Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charlie Clapham (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 move to draft. No consensus to delete, but not enough consensus to keep for me to choose keep, so onto the draftspace. (non-admin closure) ミラ P 02:06, 2 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Charlie Clapham (actor)[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)

Minor actor, recurring character in one soap but I can't find any significant sources other than namechecks, usually in the context of his former partner Jess Impiazzi. Guy (help!) 13:07, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:26, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:26, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He was in the main cast listed four or five for about 395 episodes of Hollyoaks but doesn't seem to have done much else of note, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:48, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:54, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:54, 17 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He played a significant role for a good length of time on a very notable show. At the very least he could be redirected to his character Freddie Roscoe but that does not require deletion. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:37, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep agree he had a prominent role on one of the most popular UK soaps for a long time so there should be coverage offline if not online. If I can find more rs coverage will move to a full keep, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:50, 18 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Move to draft because I don't see it meet WP:NACTOR enough to have an article yet, but maybe in near future. The article has only two sources and both are of same website. So, I will suggest to move it to draft for now until it meets criteria. --Captain Assassin! ^{«T ♦ C ♦ G»} 09:09, 28 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 16:00, 24 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Move to draft per the correct rationale for this step by Captain Assassin. BD2412 T 01:53, 2 December 2019 (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.