Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laurel Coppock
as non-notable.  The New York Times link is just licensed content that states that she appeared in a film.  It's not an actual article about her.  I removed two of the other sources, as they were not reliable: the IMDb and an promotional website.  The Patch article looks like a local newspaper, and the Groundlings website is a primary source.  She fails the criteria of , and I can not locate any other sources to establish notability.   is not a defense for this article, and she can get an article once she has become famous.  Until then, it's 
— User:NinjaRobotPirate, 22:48, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:NACTOR||WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:TOOSOON (Wikipedia:Notability)