Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Margo Cunningham

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 delete. Kurykh (talk) 00:58, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Margo Cunningham

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

not notable, unsourced -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 01:58, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. AllyD (talk) 06:32, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:16, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm trying to see if she meets WP:NACTOR. Does she have significant roles in multiple notable films? I don't think she does in A Taste of Honey, The Sailor Who Fell From Grace With The Sea, or The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie: you'd expect significant roles to be mentioned in reviews or other discussions of the work. She did have a major role in the 1980s Thames TV series Gems, but it doesn't currently have a WP article and doesn't have many sources discussing it (arguably any series on a major TV network with 120 episodes is notable). Maybe she is notable for her stage work? Maybe there are sources in old newspapers. Till then, deletion looms. Colapeninsula (talk) 15:52, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
i'll withdraw if you can find something more than minor roles to meet WP:NACTOR -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 23:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep She does have 33 IMDB credits, including some notable films. PatGallacher (talk) 16:53, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
but are they significant roles? WP:NACTOR lays out the notability guidelines for actors... which she does not meet, near as I can see. -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 23:33, 26 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 13:35, 27 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a lack of significant roles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:13, 30 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gems (TV series) was written a few days before the start of this discussion. Fuebaey (talk) 04:50, 1 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:11, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

comment we should redirect to Gems (TV series) if it does get deleted, i think -- Aunva6^{talk - contribs} 02:06, 3 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doesn't meet WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG. As she has had parts in many productions, I would say a redirect to Gems could confuse readers. Boleyn (talk) 08:26, 7 May 2017 (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.