Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Corenswet

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. RL0919 (talk) 12:37, 7 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

David Corenswet[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 roles only, so far DGG ( talk ) 06:47, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:23, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep - It is not a case of minor roles so far. The role on "The Politician" is a major role on a widely watched and covered series. Secondly Corenswet has received wide media attention. Next the role on the forthcoming show " Hollywood" is also in a leading capacity.

No disrespect intended, but, were the sources out there checked before nominating this article for deletion, as per is it accurate that he just has had minor roles? Williamsdoritios (talk) 09:20, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete has not had multiple significant roles in notable productions.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:39, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment He is what is referred to as a breakout star. This is evidenced in the rising number of page views up to 2,500 plus a day but more importantly his a key role in a widely watched series followed by another forthcoming one in a series made by Ryan Murphy a highly regarded and celebrated producer. His are not non-notable roles in non-notable productions but rather he is a much talked about young actor.Williamsdoritios (talk) 14:31, 21 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - After further research prior to "The Politician" it turns out he had the 'S***tarring" role in 'Affairs of State" as covered by major media outlets such as the Los Angelos Times and Forbes.com ...[1] and [2]Williamsdoritios (talk) 19:20, 22 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ミラ P 14:37, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia deletion policy for actors is not based only on whether the actor has had major roles in various productions. The productions themselves also have to be “notable”. Wikipedia policy defines “notable“ as a production that is the subject of more than short-term public attention as documented in written secondary sources. I think it makes sense to interpret this as meaning that people need to be writing about the production in secondary sources for longer than just the period immediately preceding or following its release, since almost every production receives written publicity and is reviewed in some publications around the time it’s released (or, if it’s a play, during the run of the play). Maybe a production is also notable if the person producing it is notable, especially if their body of work is notable, which is true of Ryan Murphy. It’s probably relevant that both “The Politician“ and “Hollywood“ already have Wikipedia pages, suggesting that they are considered notable by Wikipedia. So Corenswet had or will have a significant role in two arguably notable productions thereby arguably satisfying Wikipedia’s criteria for inclusion. I don’t think Affairs of State counts as “notable,” since was only written about in secondary sources around the time of its release (in the form of reviews). I note that that movie does not have a Wikipedia page of its own. Caroline1981 (talk) 22:26, 23 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Affairs of State Williamsdoritios (talk) 21:43, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 02:39, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - based on the following instances of significant coverage in reliable sources: 1 2 3. Passes WP:BASIC, WP:NACTOR. FOARP (talk) 16:50, 31 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the sources provided above. He passes WP:BASIC. -- Willthacheerleader18 (talk) 02:32, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Non-trivial coverage in Cosmo...Vanity Fair, etc. Subject passes WP:GNG. Lightburst (talk) 02:49, 2 November 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.