Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Conrad (actor)

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. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:34, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Conrad (actor)

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

Unsourced BLP, no major roles, fails actor notability guidelines and general notability guideline for want of significant coverage in multiple reliable, independent sources. (?) czar 02:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. czar 02:41, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Tough call, but yeah, he has no notable roles to speak of (supporting parts in Next Karate Kid and MK Annihilation being his biggest, and those were in the '90s). Article itself is badly written and unsourced. sixtynine ^{• speak up •} 18:20, 28 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment He has had some prominent roles such as in Atilla 2nd billing, Lovers and Liars 3rd, Airborne 3rd, Next Karate Kid 4thbilling ref allmovies/RT. IMDb are unreliable on this actor as they give him 2nd billing in The Promotion whereas RT and allmovies have him down about tenth. Haven't checked for reliable sources yet.Atlantic306 (talk) 01:59, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not better satisfying WP:CREATIVE. SwisterTwister talk 05:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep notable roles also include Young Hercules and now in Amazon series Patriot.RS hard to find, still looking.Is this unreliable here ? Atlantic306 (talk) 18:53, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A list of credits is not a reason to have an article on an actor. The two sources are IMDb and his personal website. Not notable. --Soetermans. T / C 22:04, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:24, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —UY Scuti ^Talk 19:36, 12 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete insufficient independent coverage. Staszek Lem (talk) 01:54, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He got mentioned by name in this review and this review, but this isn't really enough to establish notability on its own. We'd need enough reviews that critique his acting that we could create a credible article. Merely listing his filmography is better accomplished at websites like the IMDb. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 03:16, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nothing is best left to IMDb- found 6 big errors there this week alone, three of them with actors being given second billing when they should be about 10th.Any information there needs to be double-checked.Atlantic306 (talk) 16:19, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IMDb is not a reliable source czar 18:01, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't meet GNG. It's unsourced for a reason. Philafrenzy (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2016 (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.