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.  Sandstein  05:23, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fillie Lyckow (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Delete no evident claim to notability, violates BLP due to a lack of sources. JBsupreme (talk) 00:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as above; unsourced BLP. Jack Merridew 01:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —• Gene93k (talk) 01:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. —--Milowent (talk) 01:47, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete no obvious claim to notability. Orderinchaos 02:04, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep: borderline notability as per WP:notability (people). Found basic references in a few minutes [1][2][3]. Has a fairly extensive list of works. I think this artilce could be improved on. Turgan ^Talk 02:58, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I think the article is now sufficiently referenced to demonstrate notability. Turgan found some good references. When you encounter an unreferenced BLP for an actor or actress, it's worthwhile to check http://www.imdb.com Even though IMDb is not considered a reliable source, it will give you a general idea as to how much work a given actor has done. For a Swedish actor, http://www.svenskfilmdatabas.se/ is worth checking as well. - Eastmain (talk • contribs) 03:40, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Filmographies are great and all, but what kind of non-trivial coverage has this person received from reliable third party sources? JBsupreme (talk) 05:53, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Surely the film databases can not just be dismissed as "trivial", when we're talking about a large number of roles? Tomas e (talk) 15:07, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep in agreement that notability in Sweden is notabilty for en.Wikipedia, and improvement will help stem systemic bias against non-English persons... even if all the sources are in Swedish. Being unsourced is a concern, yes... but if it can be addresed through regular editing it is not cause for deletion. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:19, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. Mostly minor roles, but a lot of them over a long career, basically agrees with Turgan. Tomas e (talk) 15:04, 22 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Now sourced Vartanza (talk) 08:05, 23 January 2010 (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.