The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was weak delete, possible redirect. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Angelica Mandy[edit]

Angelica Mandy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Does not meet WP:BLP guidelines. Article has been prod'd and deleted before with nearly similar content. I recreated the article as a redirect only to List of Harry Potter films cast members as she had a very minor role in it. Actress has also appeared in Vanity Fair and thus the redirect was not considered appropriate and article was recreated as a biography. Fbv65edel — t — c // 00:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep young child actress will not have had many roles, but appears as Gabrielle Delacour in HP and the Goblet of Fire, and the young version of the main character in Vanity Fair, so notable enough. AnteaterZot (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Gabrielle's screen time consists of a shot as she enters Hogwarts, a wax double shot for approx. 1 minute as Harry saves her from underwater, a smile to her sister as she goes to compete in the third task, and a brief kiss to Ron at the end of the film. Playing the young version of a main character does not necessarily merit notability. --Fbv65edel — t — c // 05:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • The HP stuff does sound weak. Unfortunately, I haven't seen Vanity Fair either, but "playing the young version" is neither here nor there, it's how much talking she does. AnteaterZot (talk) 07:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - per Anteater above; notable enough.   jj137 (Talk) 00:33, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep, two roles in notable films might just be enough provided they weren't just super short appearances. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 00:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete for failure of WP:RS. Sorry kid, not yet. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 19:43, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Read my response to AnteaterZot above. I cannot speak for the Vanity Fair appearance, however. Still, read WP:BLP1E. "Where a person is mentioned by name in a Wikipedia article about a larger subject, but remains of essentially low profile themselves, we should generally avoid having an article on them." That means a person who might be mildly important to a larger subject, like a film, but is not generally important himself or herself, should simply be mentioned in the larger article without a wikilink. --Fbv65edel — t — c // 05:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Meets WP's notability requirements. - Rjd0060 (talk) 01:08, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: I agree. A young actress wouldn't have a long list of films they've been in. She has been in two movies that featured major actors. It's notable enough. - Kkarma (talk) 02:49, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Notability is not inherited. Being in a film that happened to "feature major actors" does not make one notable. What about Ben Borowiecki, who was in two Harry Potters, another film, and two episodes of a TV show? He was in more things with famous people, but he's not getting a page. --Fbv65edel — t — c // 05:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • This argument is strange. How else is an actor supposed to be notable, except by acting in things, or getting arrested? They can't all be Lindsay Lohan. AnteaterZot (talk) 06:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
      • An actor becomes notable by acting in things, I agree. However, not every member of a film's cast is notable. You would become notable by having a notable role, and, unless her time as Young Becky was quite notable, she's not. Take a simple Google test -- she's mentioned in 9 articles, most of them just referring to her out of journalistic integrity for mentioning the actor when mentioning a role. Two news articles mention her casting in Harry Potter when it was first learned. One article seems to be a local paper announcing her casting. I can't find any reviews of her performance in either of the films. --Fbv65edel — t — c // 16:26, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
        • She had a speaking role in Vanity Fair, as young Becky. Does that not count as something? Angelica Mandy is also in the trailer for the movie. As for mentioning her in a review, the movie was almost four years ago. Reviews for a movie that was only in theaters for a short while, and only brought in $19 million worldwide, would probably be in the back logs of the reviewers blogs. kkarma (talk) 20:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
          • I don't know the level of her speaking role in Vanity Fair, so I can't really comment on that. But if the film was not in theaters for a long time, did not fare too well at the box office, and she wasn't a star, how high is her level of notability? Sure, her speaking role counts as "something," so mention her in the Vanity Fair article. But considering there's absolutely nothing out there to reliably document her life other than the fact that she appeared in these two films, there is no point in having an article. I'm not saying we delete her name from the articles about the two movies she was in, just remove the article which describes her life because (a) we don't have anything to cite it by, and (b) she does not meet notability standards by WP:BLP. --Fbv65edel — t — c // 22:28, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep because she's cute Sorry, couldn't help it. Delete per notability and BLP, as above. I'm sure one day an article could be written about her, but not now, apparently. —ScouterSig 23:03, 19 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • She has a remarkably large fanbase, and releases private pictures of herself via her bebo, myspace, and facebook. She may not be a star yet, but she is up and coming. 70.252.81.172 (talk) 00:35, 20 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • Having a large fanbase doesn't necessarily make someone notable, and I could create a Facebook profile and upload some images of myself onto it, would that make me notable? If she had a few more roles, then sure, but at this stage, she isn;t (in my view) notable. So Delete. Gran² 14:46, 24 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Her Harry Potter role is clearly not notable (she has no spoken lines). I don't know about Vanity Fair, but it doesn't seem notable either: IMDb has no quotes and no photos of her in that movie. Furthermore, the article claims notability based on the HP role, and that claim is not valid. A large fanbase is a notability criterium according to WP:BIO, but I see no evidence of such a fanbase. Pruneau^talk 15:37, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Also referenced in BBC News and an Irish newspaper. • Lawrence Cohen 23:00, 25 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've already noted this. These articles announce her casting, which is what any good newspaper would do -- report the news. It does not talk about her role, the importance of her role, or her at all, except that she was cast. We Harry Potter fans are obsessive about knowing who's been cast in every little tiny role (see List of Harry Potter films cast members), so the news of her casting was thankfully brought by these news sources. If the only information, then, that we need to know about her, is that she played Gabrielle in movie 4, then it's on the List I just referenced. We also need to know that she played Young Becky in Vanity Fair, and she's mentioned on that film's page too. Good. Done. There's nothing else about her which is notable enough to know or which can be referenced. --Fbv65edel — t — c // 04:56, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'd be willing to concede to a Weak Keep, to be honest, and I'm usually more ready to say Delete as opposed to Keep on the borderline, but I think is just over the other side of that borderline... • Lawrence Cohen 06:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Not sure whether meeting the notability yardstick, but that is just a yardstick anyway and meeting one or more criteria does not imply that a subject should be included. And there do not seem to be sufficient sources to write an article about the person that is more than a filmography with two entries. --Tikiwont (talk) 13:00, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as failing WP:BLP due to lack of sources per Tikiwont. Bearian (talk) 18:09, 26 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.