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 no consensus. I dislike closing "no consensus", but this was already relisted twice and there clearly is no consensus either way. A discussion of whether nominations for this particular Emmy category confer notability can perhaps be had at a suitable place. If that discussion would conclude it is not enough, this article could be revisited. Randykitty (talk) 18:52, 22 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sharon Everitt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

No coverage beyond mere-mention in reliable sources, does not meet WP:GNG. While the article includes a very long filmography, almost all of the entries are uncited claims of the subject working as an editor. The subject was also nominated for an EMMY three times for producing the Disney Parks Christmas Day Parade, but never won. The few directorial credits are for short films that do not appear to be themselves notable, and for some television shows and specials of dubious notability (the most notable appears to be The High Court with Doug Benson)–all in all, I don't think this body of work satisfies WP:NDIRECTOR in the absence of solid coverage in reliable sources. Could just be WP:TOOSOON, as the subject's pivot to directorial work only happened a few years ago. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 21:55, 1 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Question Wouldn't three EMMY nominations satisfy WP:ANYBIO, #1 "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for such an award several times." ? RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:07, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My original impulse was that it wasn't a particularly important EMMY and thus didn't warrant recognition on those grounds. However, I just tried to go to the EMMY website, which lists nominees and winners for all awards, and can't seem to find any of the awards that the subject was supposedly nominated for. Unless someone can actually find a source saying that the subject was nominated for these awards (which may not even exist), I'd say it's a moot point. However, if these nominations did in fact occur, I'd be willing to reconsider their notability. In light of the sources found by RebeccaGreen and added to the article, it appears that the subject was nominated as part of a team of two other editors plus a supervising editor. I'm honestly not sure whether that should be enough to meet WP:ANYBIO or not and will leave it open to discussion by others. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 01:36, 2 January 2019 (UTC)01:42, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

She was an Executive Producer as well as one of several editors in 2014. But I'm not sure either. RebeccaGreen (talk) 01:46, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 03:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 03:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 03:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ―Abelmoschus Esculentus ^{talk / contribs} 03:06, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Women-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 07:15, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - Several Emmy nominations (or a single win) satisfies ANYBIO #1, even if they are shared Emmys. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 09:11, 2 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. There're fairly obscure Emmy categories, plus they were nominations only, and joint nominations at that. IMO there's not enough cachet in that combination. Clarityfiend (talk) 09:27, 8 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep They are Emmys, and she's been nominated three times. In the 'Outstanding Multiple Camera Editing' category it really can't be anything other than a joint nomination, so unless we say that's never notable, being nominated with others shouldn't affect her notability. RebeccaGreen (talk) 03:19, 19 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• 1/4 of a nomination ("Outstanding Special Class Special"?) + 1/3 + 1/4 = 5/6. Less than one full nomination! Clarityfiend (talk) 08:14, 20 January 2019 (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.