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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:35, 9 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Helana Sawires[edit]

Helana Sawires (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NACTOR. Only one significant role. LibStar (talk) 00:27, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:34, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:39, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per WP:BASIC. See Sydney Morning Herald and Daily Telegraph, for example. pburka (talk) 00:43, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. How quickly would it snow if that was an Oscar nomination instead of the top awards for a country that's not the USA. If she has a major award nomination for a significant role in a notable film then deletion should not be an option. Did the nominator consider alternatives to deletion such as redirecting to that film. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:56, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, for the reasons of those who want to keep this article. Davidgoodheart (talk) 21:51, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PERX, WP:EVERYONEELSE. User has also been copypasting, word-for-word, the same exact rationale since January 2019. See ANI. Pilaz (talk) 09:25, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep There is some sourcing available tending to support BASIC, and while it seems to contain some reliance on interviews, note that it is in multiple independent main stream media with editorial over view , but it could be better. And the subject does have a significant nomination. I was leaning towards TOOSOON, but I think the subject gets over that line. If they had a little bit more it would be a definite keep for me. Aoziwe (talk) 10:39, 4 February 2022 (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.