Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reed Alexander (2nd nomination)

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. MBisanz ^talk 03:34, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Reed Alexander[edit]

Nomination for deletion of previously deleted article about a non-notable actor - no referencing of any sort, article may have been written by someone with a conflict of interest Jezhotwells (talk) 14:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tagged {{db-repost}}. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 14:23, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —Jezhotwells (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article is substantially different to previous versions so I'm declining the speedy - not sure whether his career has progressed to the point of being notable but can I ask that people reassess on the basis of the current article? Ϣere SpielChequers 14:38, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also after a few minutes googling I've found some references - and some of his work is dated 2008 and 2009 which in itself is a reason to assess this article afresh as the last AFD was in 2007. Ϣere SpielChequers 15:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On the fence - If we had significant coverge in reliable sources, I'd be a weak keep on this -- the iCarly role is significant, I don't know about the Pet Detective Jr. role. Without sources (and IMDb is not a reliable source), we really have next to nothing to say about him. I'll check back in a few days to see where this stands. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:59, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep He was nominated for a Young Artist Award which I have now referenced to the organization itself rather than IMDB. It's a well-respected award in the industry and the Dutch media called them Children's Oscars. I believe such a nomination means he meets the WP:CREATIVE criterion "The person's work [...] has won significant critical attention". Referencing definitely needs work but seeing how his career is entirely in the internet age, providing reliable sources for cleanup is possible. - Mgm|^(talk) 08:08, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Withdraw nomination for deletion, when I first spotted this (after someone had vandalized it, I could only find one possible WP:RS on a very quick Google. I am please dthat other editors have cleaned it up and referenced it. Jezhotwells (talk) 11:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per notable found, improvements made, and withdrawn nomination. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 05:37, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no reliable sources discuss the subject of a BLP in any nontrvial depth (the current state of this blp) and none findable by me? Delete.Bali ultimate (talk) 13:26, 29 April 2009 (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.