Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Whittet

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 03:58, 10 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

David Whittet[edit]

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

no visible evide of notability DGG ( talk ) 00:23, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:36, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has won two awards at the Accolade Competition; here are some pieces about him: [1] [2] Taylor Trescott - ^{my talk} + _{my edits} 01:44, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Accolade Competition seems non-notable, article has no substantive content added in the 4 years since its creation. If winning 2 awards in that competition is only claim to notability for David Whittet then that would, atm, seem insufficient. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 04:34, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Not quite sure - As a producer and filmmaker, I don't think he's notable. Google News searches actually didn't find much aside from the following:, 1, here 2, here 3 and 4. I was also actually going to say delete (recusing myself from the academic side as I am unfamiliar with that) until Google Scholar found some results from what look like seemingly notable sources. As a result, I'm not sure if the academic side makes him notable. Anyone want to clarify this? SwisterTwister talk 05:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 20:42, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:45, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The only substantive article I could find is in New Zealand Doctor, a "newspaper" published fortnightly with a circulation of 3000. The Accolade awards appear to be non-notable. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:32, 22 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 07:16, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep while does not meet notability guidelines as a filmmaker, he meets WP:GNG as a doctor from the articles SisterTwister found. --Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 15:46, 9 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: That nzdoctor piece is just a niche professional pub puff piece, I have to agree with the nomination.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 22:30, 9 December 2013 (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.