Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Károly Gesztesi

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 no consensus‎. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Károly Gesztesi[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable voice actor, only known for working on dubs. 2A01:36D:1200:4638:F566:B628:7B58:B0E0 (talk) 16:27, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This discussion page was created in draftspace–I’ve moved it here on the IP’s behalf. I am neutral on the nomination itself. --Finngall ^talk 20:58, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Television, Theatre, Comics and animation, and Hungary. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 21:04, 6 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He's not only a voice actor but an actor. only known for working on dubs is simply. not. true. Various significant roles in notable films make him fairly meet WP:NACTOR... In-depth direct coverage in independent media (in Magyar) exists. Awards.....Willing to improve the page, fwiw.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 17:37, 7 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I wasn't going to vote on this one, but his non-dubbing work is not notable, so I think the prev. poster is making a very weak argument. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:28, 8 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
his non-dubbing work is not notable, how? Have you had a look at his filmography as actor by any chance? Multiple lead roles in notable films that received coverage in independent sources...a very weak argument....how? Significant roles in notable films (and a popular actor, I link that short source because it is in English, fwiw).... just have a look at the page and other existing sources, thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 15:37, 8 January 2024 (UTC) (not to mention that coverage about him makes him meet the general requirements for notability, by the way)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:36, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Fails GNG and NBIO. Sources in the article and found in BEFORE are database listings/name mentions, nothing that meet WP:IS WP:RS with WP:SIGCOV addressing the subject directly and indepth. About a third of the refs are OBITs/Membrials, the rest are name mentions and listings, except for [1], [2] which are about a lawsuit over post-death use his voice, which do not address the subject directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 22:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia:Obituaries as sources. (aka WP:OBIT) states: "Obituaries published by high-quality reliable sources are often treated as valuable sources for articles on deceased individuals, since they provide a broad overview of the subject's life." Not to mention the fact that when so many obituaries are published in the media it certainly indicates something about notability. And most of them are (obviously) addressing the (deceased) subject directly (and in depth).-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 10:03, 15 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 21:50, 20 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He has earned several awards and has appeared in several media. GoldenBootWizard276 (talk) 20:07, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Actual analysis of the available source material would be quite helpful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You could have just considered that Gesztesi fairly meets WP:NACTOR, considering his lead roles in some of the biggest successes in Hungarian cinema of the 2000s, but fair enough. Obituaries are from sources that include Népszava, Origo, IGN, Femina and Rádió 1 (hu). All of them are established media that can be considered reliable in the field of entertainment. Blikk is on the tabloid side but there too, see WP:RSP about tabloids, if the tabloid is a well-established one, news about what is obviously not a rumour (the confirmed death of a celebrity) can be used but should be used with care. Best, -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 12:19, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One can also note that the Hungarian IP used by the nominator is currently blocked and has been blocked 4 times since 2020 for reasons that include disruptive editing, BLP violations, block evasion and abuse of multiple accounts....I have seen better credentials.-My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 14:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the bar set by WP:NACTOR is fairly low, but that is the applicable guideline here. And this actor more than meets NACTOR. Owen× ☎ 19:22, 29 January 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.