Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derrick Acosta

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 Mega64. I'm leaving the history in place if anyone things there is something worth merging (pinging Premeditated Chaos for that). So Why 07:43, 8 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Derrick Acosta[edit]

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

Searches turned up zero in-depth coverage of this individual. Some trivial mentions. The group is barely notable. Barely. Fails WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:53, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been updated with more sources that verify notability. Working with influencers of the game industry and being considered by variety as a noteworthy comedy troupe should fulfill parts of the notability requirements. JXZO (talk) 07:22, 1 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The references shown in the article demonstrate a substantial notability of the subject in and amongst the video game industry. The proposed deletion based on a lack of physical news sources (books, journals, newspapers) is an archaic criticism given that the subject's line of work and area of notability would pertain mostly to more modern sources of news such as internet tech and media websites. Those who consider this subject as barely notable would have failed to realize the importance of modern forms of news consumption especially in specialized/technologically-involved subjects of interest such as the area in which this person works.JohnA-editor (talk) 04:27, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 02:04, 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) 02:04, 31 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I'm not seeing (or finding) enough to pass WP:ARTIST WP:ENT or WP:BASIC. Much of the article is about the group he is in. We already have an article about it. Many of the references are unacceptable for showing his notability (IMDB, blogs, his own company's web pages, etc). Some sources don't mention him at all, and other just mention him in passing. https://www.forbes.com/sites/olliebarder/2016/04/20/the-main-limitation-on-gaming-is-no-longer-technological-its-budgetary/#7da15f99444f for example, is both a blog and something that only mentions him in passing. It's not even about Mega64. It just happens to mention one of their videos because it ties in with the topic of the blog. Where are the independent, reliable sources about him? Meters (talk) 05:22, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say keep. Not only do the sources indicate accomplishments beyond Acosta's primary comedy group, but I'm sure that him heading multiple accomplished video production companies and being featured in multiple tv and journal shows/interviews is enough to establish that the article contains a notable subject with importance in his field. Some work could be done on providing more in-depth discussion specifically about the subject of this article since some of the sources contain him only in passing as said above, but I don't think that warrants deletion as much as it warrants more time for editing/maintenance to provide more useful information, after all that's the purpose of Wikipedia. This article hasn't been up long enough to claim it should be deleted when there is enough information in it already to establish enough notability beyond the average actor/comedian. JohnA-editor (talk) 00:06, 4 June 2017 (UTC) – Editor is a SPA whose only contributions have been to create this article, and participate in this AfD. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:43, 4 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Can we selectively (very selectively) merge and redirect to Mega64? We do that with band members to their bands, so I don't think it's unreasonable to do here. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:23, 7 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- A redirect is certainly appropriate. In fact, this article was a redirect until recently. Any deletion that has a viable redirect target should be redirected. I don't usually differentiate between the two unless there is material in an article that needs to be removed from the history, even if we will have a redirect later. In this case, though, I would say redirect, not merge. There is too much material in this article that is not pertinent to the target article. Acosta's activities outside of the group don't belong in the article about the group. Meters (talk) 21:29, 7 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.