Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alec Gray (actor)

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Alec Gray (actor)[edit]

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

No assertions of notability. Unsourced since 2014. ‖ Ebyabe ^talk - Repel All Boarders ‖ 05:38, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please dont delete this article, I just edited it today but if my edits werent good enough then change the article back to the original but please dont delete it. Maybe someone more professional can look on the talks page for Alec GRay and add as much of the stuff from the talks page as they can that will be kept. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thththththth6 (talk • contribs) 05:42, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This process is nothing personal. Wikipedia has notability guidelines such as WP:NACTOR and WP:BASIC that determine whether an article is appropriate for inclusion in Wikipedia or not. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:13, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:26, 2 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Child actor (former/retired?) who is a very clear WP:NACTOR fail. The only role that seems to approach "significance" in NACTOR terms is True Blood, and even that was just a recurring role. I don't detect any other "significant" roles. And this isn't even covering the WP:BASIC angle which looks to be an even clearer "miss" – no mentions at all in Variety. Article does not clear our notability standards, and merits deletion. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 02:13, 3 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:48, 9 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, So Why 17:46, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete TOOSOON. Unfortunately the talk page sources mentioned above are all unreliable (user-generated), and I'm unable to find reliable secondary sources either. Innisfree987 (talk) 18:03, 18 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Articles need reliable sources, IMDb is not. Nothing else is here. A bunch of bit parts does not notability make.John Pack Lambert (talk) 01:04, 21 June 2017 (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.