Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Hunter (comedian)

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 delete. czar 06:25, 20 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Hunter (comedian)[edit]

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

As it stands the article does not prove that he meets WP:ENTERTAINER or WP:GNG; A search on the web turned nothing much more than sites that all start with "Adam Hunter is one of the hottest comedians around today. He is full of exciting energy that makes the crowd go wild..." etc which is the text directly from his linkedin page Domdeparis (talk) 15:14, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:45, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 16:05, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I'm going to comment because it seems that others are reluctant to commit themselves on this discussion. His notability is definitely questionable, but he has done The Tonight Show twice, a USO Tour, Chelsea Lately, Last Comic Standing, has two CDs on iTunes, and he's a prolific headliner. He has a prima facie case for notability, which is not clearly rebuttable, and therefore I cannot advocate for deletion. - Richard Cavell (talk) 17:17, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete We need reliable, 3rd party sources, not a subjects webpage and facebook page.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- a BLP that lacks SIGCOV that discusses the subject directly & in detail. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:29, 11 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 19:17, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Without reliable secondary sources covering the subject, it is hard to see how this meets WP:ENTERTAINER. Comatmebro (talk) 20:20, 15 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete too soon for this subject. Legacypac (talk) 01:06, 16 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete He falls well short of the notability threshold at this point; he's only appeared on TV a few times at this point, there are no secondary sources focused on he himself. - GretLomborg (talk) 03:18, 16 June 2017 (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.