User talk:Emma white20/Sydney Rae White

Contesting "Speedy Deletion"

I believe this article should not be deleted because the person in question is a major cast member in a popular children's TV show, and so likely to be of interest to a significant number of users. Admittedly, the article is just a stub at the moment, but that is mainly a reflection of the difficulty of finding reliable and verifiable biographical information - The only two main sources are her official website and IMDb entry, where her biography is directly lifted from her official site. This makes referencing of information difficult, as neither are usually considered reliable or independant sources for Wikipedia articles. However, as time passes and her career develops, I'm sure more reliable and usable information will emerge, allowing this article to be expanded and improved. In the meantime, retention of this article provides a "marker" and framework for anyone able to expand the article, and saves them having to start from scratch at some point in the future. Sandi saraya (talk) 01:38, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Your rationale is basically she will be notable in the future? That goes against WP:NOT and WP:CRYSTAL. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 01:41, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

So you're saying she's "up and coming"? --Orange Mike | Talk 01:56, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Delete now and re-create later if and when she earns any notable recognition. 67.79.157.50 (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

I think the argument being made for retention is that, while she has achieved some recognition, as can be shown by looking at her IMDb entry, the only current sources of detailed information are her own official website, and a biography on IMDb which has been written and posted by her manager - neither of which qualify as independant and unbiased sources. I'll work at filling in some more info on her to expand the article, and try to track down some useable supporting references as quickly as possible. In the meantime, this article should be retained in order that this expansion work can be done. 84.65.38.7 (talk) 11:00, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

The article has now been expanded and intial references added - I'm now working to try and find some more to add. I think the fact that she's appeared in lead roles such as those listed now shows sufficient notability for this article to be retained, and so the templates in question have been removed. 84.65.38.7 (talk) 11:54, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

With all due respect 84.65.38.7 the argument could be made for retention. But if that argument is going to fall back on her having an imdb entry then is hasn't been made. To sum up the page: she went to Sylvia Young school (not notable), she appeared in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang (not a reason to have an article), she sang at the Barbican and Cadogan Hall (again not notable), she has recorded voiceovers and wants to be a musician (not notable), she made a "guest" appearance on SJA (was she billed up front, or at the end as an extra?). So the main claim to fame is As the Bell Rings but as that is a disambig page which version was she on? Because on this page there are four other actors that are redlinks, so if her main claim is that TV program then she has no real claim and should be a redlink like those other four. Darrenhusted (talk) 14:36, 17 April 2009 (UTC)