Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Judd (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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 12:15, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

John Judd (actor)[edit]

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

Insufficiently notable actor, seems to fail WP:NACTOR (no multiple significant roles, large fan base, or personal coverage). -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:44, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:18, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 11:18, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Seems to be a reasonably successful actor, but no really major roles nor press coverage. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:21, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He was a reasonably successful actor and on tv for decades, for example in Jossy's Giants. Szzuk (talk) 12:13, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. We don't give articles to journeyman actors. That's what IMDb is for (also not so successful ones). Clarityfiend (talk) 21:37, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I think the last entry says it all "Batman Begins: Narrows bridge cop." The guideline is the roles have to be significant. This at least means they need to be something that would come up in a resonable length plot summary. This role will not come up short of a description of everything that happens in the film, and it would have to border on every event that happens within the film, no matter how likely a viewer is to notice the event. This is why some of the defennses of keeping articles on journeymen actors that come down to "he was in 50 film, he must be notable" should not be accepted. We have far too many articles on actors with only one listed source where that one source is IMDb.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:22, 7 April 2018 (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.