Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Crane

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. ✗plicit 03:34, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Matt Crane[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)

Fails WP:NACTOR… one notable role on Another World, and that is it. Bgsu98 (talk) 03:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Television. Bgsu98 (talk) 03:25, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 10:00, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It is time for Wikipedia to stop using IMDb as a source, let alone the only source on articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:24, 13 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. NACTOR requires "significant roles" in "multiple" programs, so Crane doesn't pass that threshold even assuming the Another World role is "significant". Searching for GNG-qualifying sources is difficult because he has such a common name, but what I found isn't quite enough to establish notability, in my view. There are a few articles available at Newspapers.com, but they appear to be either too brief to count as sigcov or too interview-ish to count as independent sources. I don't think a redirect would be helpful since he's played a number of roles, although I wouldn't oppose one. Glad to reconsider if someone can find sources I've missed. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 00:35, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Extraordinary Writ, the Another World role was a regular, long-term role; but he simply had very little beyond that, and certainly nothing coming close to significant or notable. Bgsu98 (talk) 00:38, 20 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Does not meet notability guidelines Proton Dental (talk) 01:38, 20 July 2022 (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.