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 keep, but sourcing should be improved. This outcome does not immunize the article against a future deletion proposal, if the quality remains unchanged. bd2412 T 12:50, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Laurie Zimmer[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Actress who has questionable notability. The only role and film that seems to have any notability is Assault on Precinct 13 (1976 film), which if not a delete-she should be redirected to there. (The other 2 films don't seem to have much notability and from the look of it-neither do her roles) Even though there is a documentary about her it looks like, which could make her pass gng and remain as a article (I was unsure due to that reason mainly if I should put this up or not) Wgolf (talk) 22:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 22:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 23:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Hope we can find some more sources for this subject. The article gets decent viewcounts for a lower-level actress BLP. Article has been around for 13 years.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 14:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Ali1jassim (talk) 16:52, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked sockpuppet. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:40, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment-If you want to keep it, you need a reason to keep the article. (Though the user who said keep seems to be saying keep on other afd's also without reason). Wgolf (talk) 17:20, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep A bit tenuous, but she had a significant supporting role in at least one major film (Assault on Precinct 13) and was the subject of a documentary, which has been discussed at at least a few film magazines for it's inclusion on the blu-ray extras of Assault [1]. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 12:50, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Definitely enough contend, particularly for a pre-internet celebrity of her era. Montanabw^(talk) 19:44, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment-Well the one big issue is that the article does need sources. Wgolf (talk) 19:47, 11 June 2019 (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.