Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shannon Lark
appears almost totally unnotable" is a statement at odds with |research in |reliable sources, as she does indeed have |extensive genre coverage. And a film not having articles means either '''A.''' no one has written the article yet, or '''B.''' someone did and the film proved non-notable.  So while it would seem that Ms. Lark would be hard pressed to meet , the article is not asserting that such is her claim to notablity.  The assertions for (genre) notability is for her being a spokesmodel and scream queen... and THAT assertion seems to be easily verifiable... and she does have coverage in multiple sources for the last eleven years.http://news.google.com/archivesearch?as_user_ldate=2000&as_user_hdate=2011&q=%22Shannon+Lark%22+source%3A%22-newswire%22+source%3A%22-wire%22+source%3A%22-presswire%22+source%3A%22-PR%22+source%3A%22-release%22+source%3A%22-wikipedia%22&scoring=a&q=%22Shannon+Lark%22+source%3A%22-newswire%22+source%3A%22-wire%22+source%3A%22-presswire%22+source%3A%22-PR%22+source%3A%22-release%22+source%3A%22-wikipedia%22&lnav=od&btnG=Go  Strange assertion, sure... as it does not rank up there with the "glory" of being an Oscar or Nobel prize winner... but as an assertion it meets the GNG and passes . Even a minor notability, and even in a genre field, can meet guideline, and be notability none-the-less
— User:MichaelQSchmidt, 00:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:BEFORE||WP:RS||WP:GNG||WP:ENT||WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion)