Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh LaBove (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Liz Read! Talk! 00:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Josh LaBove (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:AUTOBIO (see creator's username, as he didn't even try to hide) about an actor, not properly sourced as passing WP:NACTOR. As always, actors are not automatically notable enough for Wikipedia articles just because they exist -- the notability test isn't in listing roles, it's in showing WP:GNG-worthy reliable source media coverage about at least some of their performances: biographical coverage about them, reviews of the films or TV shows that single their performances out for dedicated attention, properly sourced evidence that they won or were nominated for a major acting award, and on and so forth.
But the closest thing to a notable role listed here is a television commercial, not a major starring role in a feature film or television series -- he only ever had bit parts otherwise, but the article has existed since 2006, and has been tagged for lacking sources since 2019, without ever having even one reliable or GNG-worthy source in it at all.
Nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG on his sourceability. Bearcat (talk) 16:09, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(All accessed though the Wikipedia libary)
I don't think it's enough to push him into notability under #7 of WP:NACADEMIC but it might be worth someone who's better at finding academic sources looking some more. Shaws username . talk . 17:39, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 23:17, 29 February 2024 (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.