Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Brenner (writer)

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 redirect to Thomas_&_Friends#Hit_Entertainment. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:08, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew Brenner (writer)[edit]

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

The gentleman exists, but is not notable. BLPPROD was removed by an experienced editor despite the only independent source being IMDB which is not WP:RS. Fails WP:GNG Fiddle Faddle 09:54, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Thomas_&_Friends#Hit_Entertainment. While Brenner has done other things, he seems to be predominantly known for his work with Thomas & Friends. He's mentioned in the article under the Hit Entertainment section, so I can see a rationale for redirecting there. I have no problem with someone userfying this, if they so wanted. The problem here is that staff writers tend to not get much, if any, coverage from reliable sources. There are some fansites that comment upon him, but not much else. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:52, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or possible redirect. Lack of substantial coverage in reliable independent sources. Candleabracadabra (talk) 13:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Either Delete or rediredct per Tokyogirl. He does not seem to ahve done enough to merit having an article. Peterkingiron (talk) 18:08, 20 September 2013 (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.