Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Ager (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 keep. The coverage of the independent sources can be combined to meet WP:BASIC. (non-admin closure) Qwaiiplayer (talk) 14:19, 27 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Ager[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)

No evidence of notability presented, person primarily mentioned only in passing in articles, one that is about the person is an interview, so not a secondary source. A search failed to find anything particularly noteworthy, and looks to have failed WP:NBIO. Nominating this since a notability tag has been repeated removed without explanation or improvement to the sourcing, therefore seeking wider community opinion on this. Hzh (talk) 13:27, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 14:50, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. DonaldD23 talk to me 15:27, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:39, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep He is a notable person. Per WP:NBIO, "multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability". Major publications like the NYT and Esquire have discussed him, his theories, and anaylses. The New York Film Academy deemed him notable enough for not one, but two interviews. In one interview they describe him as "one of the first internet-based movie critics and [having] also helped pioneer the video movie critique". Also pinging Silver seren, who previously discussed the notability. ~ HAL333 15:57, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I'm confused on how the existing sources don't establish notability. There are reliable sources talking specifically with and about Ager's work, which by the way seems to be used around the world in film theory classes. His work is covered in a variety of news, from The Irish Times to Wired. And just a ton of books, from American Cosmic to The Screen Is Red to Esoteric Hollywood to Conspiracies Uncovered to The Suspense of Horror and the Horror of Suspense to Alfred Hitchcock's Vertigo and the Hermeneutic Spiral. I could go on a lot longer if you want. Silver seren^C 20:29, 19 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on what Silver seren said and presented. Peter303x (talk) 18:12, 20 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm unsure about this. Notability for YouTubers (and other people mostly known for what they do online) is always a bit tricky to assess. Ager would certainly pass WP:NENTERTAINER criterion 2: Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following, but that has since been deprecated (I learned upon looking it up for this AfD). His videos/essays/theories/analyses have been cited a fair number of times as demonstrated above, but I'm not convinced that he meets either WP:NSCHOLAR or WP:NAUTHOR on account of this (I don't know that I would consider a chemist or journalist notable based on this level of coverage of their work). It might be better to cover what Ager says about specific pieces of media in the corresponding media articles (e.g. Interpretations of 2001: A Space Odyssey and The Shining (film)#Spatial layout of the Overlook Hotel, as noted in the previous AfD nomination) in WP:DUE proportion rather than having a biographical article where such content would (at least in my mind) seem a bit out of place. I would be interested in what the people who participated in the previous AfD back in 2015 think. @Silent Key, Ianmacm, Ormr2014, and Shrillpicc100: Care to weigh in? TompaDompa (talk) 00:16, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm also unsure about this. What is being proposed is not really a biography, more of an online résumé. Needs more depth.--♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 07:13, 21 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep based on what Silver seren presented. I'm pretty sure he passes based on 1-2 criteria of WP:AUTHOR. Koikefan (talk) 05:14, 25 August 2021 (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.