Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michelle Kim

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. - Mailer Diablo 04:20, 25 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Kim

Non-notable actress. IMDb lists four appearences on one television show and no other credits [1]. IrishGuy ^talk 01:58, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am nominating (unorthodoxly) the following related pages with the same motivations] Cate |_Talk 10:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC):[reply]

The following arguments were added before the addition of the four other articles.

Delete, can find nothing that would establish any notability. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 02:06, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Completely fails notability. V60 ^{VTalk · VDemolitions · Editor review 2!} 02:30, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:BIO. Djma12 02:43, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Artaxiad 02:50, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - non-notable. So non-notable, in fact, that the article even gets the sex wrong. ConDem^Talk 05:18, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The following arguments were made after the addition of the four other articles.

Delete all - non notable. I added the other article, to speedy up the process, and I think there will be no objection (on deletion and on addition of other articles). Cate |_Talk 10:34, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Generally, you should not add new articles to an AfD after discussion has already begun. I personally agree that the four other articles should also be deleted, however, you'd be much better off to reverse the addition and start a separate AfD for the four others. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me Please review me!} 10:49, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Reply. I know, but personally I had done a speedy deletion. Cconsidering your comment, the next time I will follow better the rules and not assume to much ;-) . Anyway to simplify the admins work: the articles are short and very similar (but the names, sex and imdb link). The imdb pages are similar. A small note: Robert Lipsett links to Michelle Kim, but it was an other person: Assistant Concertmaster of the New York Philharmonic Cate |_Talk 11:07, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Delete. I put some forward for speedy deletion, they should have gone out there (A7, non-notable bio). MHDIV ɪŋglɪʃnɜː(r)d(Suggestion?|wanna chat?) 12:45, 20 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I'm not voting on this one, but I do want to point out that IMDb is not a good source for television information. Movies, yes. Television, no. Many, many shows are not up to date on who did what episodes, and many of them don't display the main characters on the main page. I think for TV stuff, I'd take TV.com, TVGuide.com, and Zap2It over IMDb... -- Grev 03:44, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Tv.com and TVguide.com have absolutely nothing on Michelle Kim. IrishGuy ^talk 03:49, 21 February 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.