Eva Vik (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)

Non notable film maker. No notable productions. Lots of awards but none are major. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Wonderland is straight PR with no by-line. Forbes plethora of top howevermany of whatever are not significant. LA Weekly is straight PR. Same with Flaunt. There is a big push to promote her but Wikipedia is not a venue for that. Spam built by a cast of SPAs, UPE and socks. Telling is the representation in the opening sentence. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:25, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Women, Czech Republic, and California. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:30, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: What about the awards here? Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 07:21, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Quote from above "Lots of awards but none are major." There are a LOT of festivals, award ceremonies, award farms, whatevers that hand out or sell a lot of awards, at times making up categories so they can give everyone an award. Listing awards is not enough, they has to be something significant about them. duffbeerforme (talk) 12:41, 31 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Well, I agree that this is an attempt at WP:PROMO but I don’t agree with the impression that winning awards is insignificant. I have no opinion on the notability of this topic in question and would not !vote. Best, Reading Beans, Duke of Rivia 11:36, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  So you don't agree with an argument that hasn't been presented. That's useful. Good for you. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:20, 1 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. User:Duffbeerforme, no need to be snarky to an editor who took the time to consider your proposal. We need to encourage participation here at AFD, of all kinds.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:29, 7 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep: Passes WP:GNG with coverage from Deadline (by Zac Ntim et. al.) and Vogue (Czech), with the most significant coverage in the LA Weekly and the Wonderland Magazine references. I acknowledge these latter sources have a entertainment publication-style tone but haven't seen any conversation on talk pages that they don't count towards notability, especially LA Weekly. Nnev66 (talk) 17:33, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note - that LA Weekly bit is from a known spamming PR/SEO flack. It's a 'guest post' that's not marked as paid placement. Also note that the international "branded" franchises of reliable sources like Vogue or Forbes are often pretty sketchy. There's a lot of unearned media in play in this article as it is. Sam Kuru (talk) 23:09, 11 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]