Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heath Franklin

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 keep. MBisanz ^talk 00:09, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Heath Franklin

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

Not notable. No third party mentions or references. Nothing on news searches No third party references on web searches other than promotional Article reads like an advertisement. No references or citations to back up any of the article content. Claims therefore appear dubious. No verifiable indications of notability. Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:N isfutile:P (talk) 18:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There is news coverage out there, for example a New Zealand Herald review from the Auckland Inernational Comedy Festival (via Highbeam, subscription required), a Scotsman review from this year's Edinburgh Festival Fringe, a previous year's brief mention in The Guardian. As to whether there is enough for notability, that is another matter. AllyD (talk) 18:49, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
keep ARIA nominated artist. Frequent guest appearances on TV shows. Significant coverage seems to exist. The-Pope (talk) 13:10, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is there any evidence of this regarding notability, and/or can a cite be added? My main concern is that this individual portrays a fictional comedy character based on "Chopper" | Chopper Read. Chopper Read is notable, but there's little to suggest this comedy character, or the person who plays the comedy character - Heath Franklin - is notable in his own right. All of the material I've seen so far plays on the notability of Chopper Read, and not Heath Franklin. In particular, there's nothing about Heath Franklin in biographies (or the Wiki) page of Chopper Read - which strongly suggests the notability is on Read, and not Franklin.isfutile:P (talk) 15:29, 18 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Grahame (talk) 01:33, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Trove shows sources exist including two articles in major national newspapers that are primarily about him. --LauraHale (talk) 01:37, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:48, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Not notable as an individual and none of the claims on the article are sourced there also appears to be a lot of puffery. 213.246.82.22 (talk) 20:19, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Puffery can be removed by editing. Why do you not consider the sources offered above to demonstrate notability? Phil Bridger (talk) 20:47, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per substantial coverage in reliable sources (The Age and the SMH) provided by LauraHale. Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 06:40, 20 October 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Keep per The-Pope, LauraHale and Lankiveil. I have added some additional sources to the article and plan to add more. DH85868993 (talk) 07:10, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete There's no significant coverage for Heath Franklin. The coverage which exists refers in the main to the criminal Chopper Read. There's some coverage relevant to TV programs which Heath Franklin played a contributory role in, and these already have their own wiki pages. There's no significant coverage with primary relevance to Heath Franklin as a comedian. Therefore it's fine to include Heath Franklin in these other wiki pages as a contributor, or a mention in the Chopper Read page, but there's nothing (yet) to indicate sufficient notability for a Heath Franklin wiki page. Also, IMDB isn't an RS and shouldn't be used in an AfD... 23.23.86.226 (talk) 18:32, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. This article in the Sydney Morning Herald (surely that counts as an RS?) is not about Chopper Read; it's about Franklin, his past works (including his Chopper Read impersonation, of course) and his (at the time) upcoming stage show. DH85868993 (talk) 00:25, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that article confers notability. It states: "Heath Franklin, famous for his Chopper Read character..." - Heath Franklin isn't famous or notable in his own right. Chopper Read is the one who is famous and notable, and there's already a Wiki article for him. Perhaps a merge would be the best result, and a section on Heath Franklin added to the Chopper Read article?213.246.82.22 (talk) 02:41, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Blatant advertising for a nowhere near notable club comedian - no place for this on Wikipedia. 202.71.129.154 (talk) 18:51, 20 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Logie-nominated, ARIA-nominated, decent coverage in the SMH and Age, cast member of The Ronnie Johns Half Hour, appears on Randling & Spicks & Specks. Doctorhawkes (talk) 03:17, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Logie and ARIA nominated and easily meet WP:GNG. Here's three more sources just from October -- BYRNE, MATT (7 October 2012), "CAN'T CHOP OUT CROWD PLEASER ON STAGE", Northern Advocate -- Chenoweth, Ben (11 October 2012), "Laugh, but stay off this chap's list", Parramatta Sun -- "Laugh or it could be chop, chop, chop", Northern Advocate, 19 October 2012. The strawman about him not being as notable as Chopper is irrelevant. The calls for deletion after this nomination come across as some sort of personal vendetta. duffbeerforme (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Significant coverage by reliable secondary sources has been demonstrated above. The article does appear to meet the notability guideline for biographies.--xanchester (t) 16:13, 24 October 2012 (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.