Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Keever (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. MBisanz ^talk 20:19, 30 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Keever[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)

I don't see anything different from the first AFD aside from some new uncredited roles on iMDb as a production assistant, despite the clear attempt to WP:COATRACK here. Praxidicae (talk) 11:06, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Advertising-related deletion discussions. Ceethekreator (talk) 11:30, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:21, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, Praxidicae, way to jump all over something right away. I've clearly cited other sources than IMDb, although it is an accredited source within the film industry and policed very well. So, if you would like to attack verifiable newspaper and advertising agency sources then please be my guest. As this is a page still in progress it will have additional information added. Congratulations on your editor of the week, you must have amazing articles that have no room to be chipped away at or attempts at COATRACKING. Ridiculous. If all articles are viewed this way, there will never be another subject added to Wikipedia. Mrsandoval70 (talk) 20:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)mrsandoval70[reply]

iMDb is not a reliable source nor is it "policed well" and I can give you hundreds of examples of this, however your immediate attack still doesn't address issues I brought up - almost nothing has changed since the last AFD and you wrongfully attempted to fluff up the article by claiming he had bigger roles in all of the films you mentioned than he actually did - all of which are uncredited. Also "advertising agencies"? Yeah, those aren't good sources.Praxidicae (talk) 20:40, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - nothing here looks anything like notability. Mentions and/or press releases only. Fails WP:GNG Velella ^{Velella Talk} 20:33, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Does not meet general notability criteria. Spyder212 (talk) 22:24, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom and salt. Fails WP:CREATIVE by a wide margin, and I don't want to have to revisit this. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:25, 23 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Exactly ten edits, then a promotional article for someone whose article was previously deleted at AfD as the eleventh edit? That's a bingo. Delete under WP:NOTPROMO, which is policy. Bakazaka (talk) 00:04, 25 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not WP:GNG Lubbad85 (☎) 02:43, 26 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete piling on.E.M.Gregory (talk) 00:53, 30 April 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.