Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shep Houghton

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. slakr^\ talk / 08:22, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Shep Houghton[edit]

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

I'd like to nominate Shep Houghton for two reasons. First, there's little evidence of him being alive at the age of 99. Secondly, there are literally no sources that indicate that he was notable in any way. Looking at his IMDb page, I see that he was uncredited in almost every film/television show listed there. Also, the source that was used as basis for the Wikipedia page doesn't work anymore. Comments? OscarLake (talk) 17:47, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails WP:NACTOR. Sole source (IMDB) is not considered a reliable source for biographical information, without any other source would fail WP:BIO and WP:V. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 20:10, 5 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:36, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: oldest surviving actor from Gone With the Wind, and one of the few remaining silent film actors (albeit as a child actor). IMDb is not reliable in some ways for biodata, but the filmography is reliable. Houghton also has this reflink, albeit with the apparent wrong age. Also, "First, there's little evidence of him being alive at the age of 99", is not a ground for deletion in and of itself; that can be verified with SAG/AFTRA. Quis separabit? 17:40, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I retract my first argument about him being alive or not. But the rest remains, which is that he was non-notable throughout his career. Even if the IMDb filmography is accurate, he was almost never credited in any of them. He was mostly used as a background dancer, soldier, etc. Should we keep him just because he's one of the last surviving silent film actors and Gone With the Wind? If so, then longevity is his only claim to fame. Think about it this way, if he had died in 1995, would anyone have heard of him? Also, the link you showed is a Wordpress blog that I can't take seriously. Just look at what the guy wrote about Baby Peggy. Lol. OscarLake (talk) 19:05, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Baby Peggy thing is vandalism, obviously. Look, I won't lose any sleep over the article being deleted; I just don't see the need for it. My vote stands. But I understand your point about non-notability; I am the one who AFDed Clarice Sherry, for the same reason, although the cases are not identical and there was some apocrypha there and a fairly tiny filmography, unlike Houghton, whose career spans from 1927 to 1975. Quis separabit? 19:51, 6 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NACTOR states that to be notable the person should meet one of the following:

Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Clearly he fails 2 and 3, and there is no evidence that he had "significant roles" in any films (being largely uncredited) thereby failing 1 as well. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 09:22, 8 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, but sometimes you just gotta go with IAR. Quis separabit? 22:04, 8 February 2014 (UTC) Again, if he makes it to 4 June he will be a centenarian (actor by profession), and one of the few remaining living people connected to both silent films and Gone With the Wind, which I think just narrowly qualifies him. Again, I didn't create the article nor will I lose sleep if it's deleted, but... Quis separabit? 15:12, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Regards, MrScorch6200 (talk · contribs) 21:00, 15 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep He appeared in both Gone with the Wind and the Wizard of Oz and there seem to be enough book sources which confirm these facts. Andrew (talk) 00:00, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing about the claims (even whether he's still alive) can be sourced. I'm assuming Andrew is referring to this mention in Victor Fleming: An American Movie Master in reference to The Wizard of Oz; that doesn't state he was in the picture (IMDb doesn't list it as one of his "uncredits"), only that he had encounters with the Munchkins at the studio. Those couple of sentences and IMDb's 99% uncredited roles are all we've got. Not even close to enough. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:25, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Clarityfiend: "IMDb doesn't list it as one of his "uncredits"? Yes it does (i.e. Gone with the Wind (1939), "Southern Dandy (uncredited)") Quis separabit? 03:56, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are there Southern Munchkins now? I thought they all got blown away by the severe flow of gasses. Oz-some. Clarityfiend (talk) 12:08, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain." The subject seems to have been like a top session musician and has been so prolific as an extra and bit-part player that they appear in this list of The Most Powerful People In Hollywood. Andrew (talk) 10:29, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Andrew, I think that says more about the authors' competence than it does about Shep's notability. One of the most powerful in Hollywood? Haha...First they acknowledge that he was uncredited in most of his roles, but then they deem his contributions as "essential"? It doesn't make sense. OscarLake (talk) 12:03, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well they have to put somebody in at 99. Beggars can't be choosers. (At least we know he's still upright.) Sic 'em, Eli! Clarityfiend (talk) 12:09, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete uncredited or " extra" roles do not confer notability per WP:NACTOR. None of his film roles was minimally significant. No chance this individual passes GNG. Cavarrone 10:02, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While he was in multiple notable films, he did not have a significant role in any film, he is not notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:59, 21 February 2014 (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.