Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Kirkham

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 Move to TV Junkie. J04n(talk page) 11:14, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Kirkham[edit]

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

Tagged for notability for 5 years; couldn't establish notability Boleyn (talk) 15:58, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete After looking for sources about the person and the documentary I don't think either of them meet WP:GNG. There is some out there, but in my opinion it's not enough. No prejudice to redirecting to the documentary if it existed, but it doesn't. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 18:49, 16 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 17:32, 17 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 02:10, 23 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 02:31, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Move to TV Junkie or keep. The film is notable, with reviews[1][2][3] and press coverage[4][5]. Kirkham may also be notable for the media coverage: being subject of the documentary[6] (which wasn't made by Kirkham though it used footage he filmed, so it can be classed as independent) counts to establish notability. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:30, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Move' to the film name as suggested by Cola; that seems reasonable and, as noted, the film is clearly notable. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 03:35, 6 February 2013 (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.