Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lizzie Olsen

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 of the debate was no consensus. W.marsh 00:22, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Lizzie Olsen

Article does not establish any grounds for notability, seems to fail WP:BIO Yamla 02:08, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete From Wikipedia:Notability (people): In 100 years time will anyone without a direct connection to the individual find the article useful? I hear a no. joturner 02:31, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- It is also noted in those guidelines that that criteria is not official policy. Personally I find it is in contravention of Wikipedia is not a crystal ball which is policy.
- That's also an "alternative test" that "may not have wide consensus." She seems notable enough for some expansion, so keep. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:27, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep doesnt appearing in movies with your extremely famous sisters qualify you as notable.--Kev62nesl 05:39, 13 June 2006 (UTC)
Keep. Appeared in several of her sisters movies which makes her notable enough for mine. Capitalistroadster 07:17, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The "100-year test" strikes me as unduly harsh. on the other hand, this one looks like it would fail the "5-year test". --Calton | Talk 07:33, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails WP:BIO. --Coredesat 07:42, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, being related to notable people doesn't confer notability. Angus McLellan (Talk) 09:54, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, as the information is sparse, and their doesn't appear to be potential for expansion. However, the existing information is notable enough to be merged into Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen if it isn't already. David L Rattigan 10:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn Matthew Fenton (TALK - CONTRIBS) 12:07, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen after deleting what is currently there (as she is unnotable, utterly). Proto||type 14:18, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, passes WP:BIO. Silensor 17:00, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete- does not meet WP:BIO in my opinion. Being related to a famous person does not cause the notability to rub off. Reyk _YO! 20:37, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Being related to the Olsen twins is not sufficient to be notable, but appearing in films is. --Danielrocks123 21:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- "Girl in car..." gimma a break - only known due to her sisters. She has no career of her own. Rklawton 23:14, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Child actress in numerous successful films. The "girl in car" role is probably small, but the "Lizzie" roles aren't. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 23:20, 13 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The movie role was her only movie role - and it was a bit part, and the film was certainly not a success. The only other credits consisted of a few, low-rated, 30 minute "adventures" shows where she played kid sister to the twin-leads. The salient point here is that she has no career of her own. Rklawton 00:12, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

delete being someone' sister doesn't necessarily make you notable. Trm3 11:32, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep; Danielrocks123 said it best. Ziggurat 21:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A mention on her sisters' page will be sufficient. GassyGuy 00:27, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge, the info is encyclopedic, it's just a question of where to store it. bbx 06:53, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
keep - Arual 17:58, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Her career is simply not extensive or notable enough. WP is not IMDB2. Eluchil404 20:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete She just isn't notable enough on her own. Perhaps in the future if she does more films and such, but not at the moment. --Auger Martel 10:40, 17 June 2006 (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.