Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Blake Michael (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 delete. -- Cirt (talk) 07:11, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blake Michael[edit]

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

Removed my own prod when the earlier AfD came up (not sure how I missed it). Role in Lemonade Mouth is new since then. Prior AfD came up with four brief/insubstantial references in reliable sources. Current article completely lacks substantial coverage in independent reliable sources and I am unable to find any. Not notable. SummerPhD (talk) 03:07, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Delete it! He is at least an actor! rtucker913 (talk) 08:54, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Yes, he is an actor. However, he is not a notable actor. - SummerPhD (talk) 00:20, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:37, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I just noticed the prior AfD. Result was delete. Tagged for speedy deletion. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Speedy declined. This version (though still lacking independent sources) is significantly different. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:00, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Added more references to prove he is a notable actor Blondewitch (talk) 06:59, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Thank you for the additional sources. However, I am not finding anything approaching substantial coverage.

adage.com in a photo caption “Blake Michael, host of Cartoon Network's Fried Dynamite”. Not substantial coverage.

animation magazine.com gives us virtually nothing about Blake Michael, the subject of this article. “Blake“ (no last name) is either Blake Michael or the fictionalized Blake hosting the show. In either case, he’s 10 years old and will be hosting ‘’Friday Dynamite’’. Not substantial coverage.

kidsturncentral.com presents a press release from Excite Books briefly discussing what 11 year old Micheal will be doing for them. Not independent.

itunes.com gives us a page where you can indeed buy the non-notable song he recorded with someone else who is not notable. The song exists, which does nothing for notability.

deadline.com does not give any indication it is a reliable source. In any case, its bare mention of Michael tells us he will be in ‘’Lemonade Mouth” and was discovered in an open casting call (implying he was unknown otherwise). Not significant coverage and seems to indicate any notability would hinge on the then up-coming ‘’Lemonade Mouth’’ role.

becksmithhollywood.com is apparently a blog presenting an interview with a ‘’Lemonade Mouth’’ producer. Total content about Michael: “Heartthrob-to-be Blake Michael ‘is really the Cinderfella of this whole thing. He sent in a self-made tape with his mother reading lines with him in Atlanta. The tape just popped. We knew we had to have him,’ Chase recalls.” Not substantial coverage. - SummerPhD (talk) 14:08, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment - Five more sources added. Three are bare mentions (ocregister.com, variety.com, mtv.com). One blog (disnology.com). And this other thing (girlslife.com) telling us he likes magic tricks, helped make breakfast on Mother's Day once and he once talked back to a teacher in kindergarten. Still fails WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:GNG. - SummerPhD (talk) 21:26, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment-
- Comment- The article from deadline.com says Blake was discovered at an open casting call by Disney. The article is inferring that Disney was not familiar with him prior to that casting call, not that Blake lacked a career prior to that casting. Additionally, the comments, specifically about Blake, by the executive producer of Lemonade Mouth are indeed substantial. Ms. Debra Martin Chase, producer of multiple hits including Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants, Princess Diaries, Cheetah Girls, and more, has been involved in casting/discovering Blake Lively, America Ferrera, Anne Hathaway, and others. A quote from Ms. Chase referring to Blake as a "heartthrob-to-be" and saying "we knew we had to have him," is substantial. Blake has not only been quoted, but his quote and name comprises the sub-headline of an article in a MTV.com news article (which has been referenced.) Perhaps Blake's Wikipedia article needs to be short like another cast member, Naomi Scott, whose entry contains just 3 references (sharing one in common with Blake) and those references don't contain any more biographical information than Blake's. So out of all the references on Blake's article none of them are notable? Really? Blake Michael's article should not be deleted.Blondewitch (talk) 22:46, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment - The content from the executive producer is not "substantial" as in it does not say anything substantial about Michael. Substantial coverage would give us biographical info about him: where and when he was born, schooling, family and such. Instead, we have that the producer considers him a "heartthrob-to-be" and such. We have numerous sources that mention him in passing or quote a single sentence from him. We need reliable sources that tell us substantial biographical info about him. At present he does not meet WP:ENT based on his roles. This leaves us with the general notability guideline: "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". PLEASE read the explanation there. It explains what we mean by "significant coverage", for instance. At the moment, you're just adding insubstantial coverage, unreliable sources and independent sources. - SummerPhD (talk) 01:31, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 14:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Obviously User:Blondewitch is heavily invested in defending the article - this and the previous one constitute almost all her Wikipedia activity - but this is a classic case of throwing some threadbare references, any threadbare references, up in an attempt to meet GNG. These sources either fail WP:RS or do not discuss the subject in the "significant detail" required. It falls on WP:ENTERTAINER, but the subject fails that as well: demonstrably he has not had "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Ravenswing 17:52, 3 June 2011 (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.