Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dave Thornton
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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The result was Keep nomination withdrawn (non-admin closure) Whpq (talk) 16:39, 18 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Dave Thornton[edit]
- Dave Thornton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Stand-up comedian with no verifiable claims of notability, self-created vanity article, a smattering of non-notable awards won. No evidence that this passes baseline notability standards as outlined at WP:N or WP:BIO. Jayron32 03:05, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep He may have created it himself, but his IMDb filmography details a person just notable enough for inclusion. A Google search for "Dave Thornton Australia" returns plenty of reliable-source profiles and reviews of comedy shows. Perhaps delete and recreate, since the current article is self created. --FuriousFreddy (talk) 04:59, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No need to "delete and recreate"... as now that it's here, it belongs to Wikipedia... and improvements have been ongoing. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:29, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I think the article is salvagable. I just did a bit of cleaning up. I'll try to come back later to do some referencing. Evalpor (talk) 19:37, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I did some more cleaning up, and added a number of references. This subject is obviously notable. The article can use some more tidying up, but I think it should pass notability at this point. Evalpor (talk) 20:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I appreciate the effort, but I see little in the way of "extensiveness" or "substantialness" in these references. In sum total, there looks to be about 15 sentances in existance in reliable sources which discuss him, and they all seem to be of the sort "Commedian Dave Thornton is appearing at Funny Bones on May 21" with little else. My wedding anouncement contained more biographical information about me than any of these do. One's name existing in print is never enough for WP:N-minimum standards. Many people have had their name in the newspaper a few dozen times in their lives, it doesn't mean that such is enough for a Wikipedia article to be built around. I don't see where ANY of the references contain any useful information about his life beyond "He exists" and "he has a job as a commedian." Existing and having an occupation aren't usually enough for minimum notability standards. --Jayron32 01:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Oh... his career meets WP:ENT and there's just enough to meet the WP:GNG... and naturally, and per policy, even the most mundane of information must be verified without the coverage in all reliable sources having to also all be "in depth". Luckily, enough is... and enough other of the less-than-substantial sources properly verify the notability in the further improved article. . Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I appreciate the effort, but I see little in the way of "extensiveness" or "substantialness" in these references. In sum total, there looks to be about 15 sentances in existance in reliable sources which discuss him, and they all seem to be of the sort "Commedian Dave Thornton is appearing at Funny Bones on May 21" with little else. My wedding anouncement contained more biographical information about me than any of these do. One's name existing in print is never enough for WP:N-minimum standards. Many people have had their name in the newspaper a few dozen times in their lives, it doesn't mean that such is enough for a Wikipedia article to be built around. I don't see where ANY of the references contain any useful information about his life beyond "He exists" and "he has a job as a commedian." Existing and having an occupation aren't usually enough for minimum notability standards. --Jayron32 01:10, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 04:55, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:05, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:06, 15 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Per meeting WP:ENT and closing in on WP:GNG. Notability (and coverage) in Australia are notable enough for en.Wikipedia. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 07:25, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep The information now in the article shows this person is clearly notable. Dream Focus 09:40, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdraw Nomination Work done since the last time I commented above has added sources which review the person's work and which discuss him in an in-depth manner. It is now clear that the subject passes WP:GNG. Thanks to everyone that worked to improve it; this is by far a better result than deletion would have been. Please keep adding sources and improving the article after this nomination gets closed. --Jayron32 15:51, 17 May 2010 (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.