Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josh Bogert

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. Joyous! | Talk 01:49, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Bogert[edit]

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

Fails WP:BLP and WP:NMUSIC. Mr. Guye (talk) 02:01, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not pass the notability requirements for actors.John Pack Lambert (talk) 02:06, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- A7 material. No indications of notability or significance. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:42, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable and frankly this could go under CSD A7. Safiel (talk) 04:39, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as WP:TOOSOON, and a WP:NACTOR fail. I was going to give the author a couple of weeks before AfD'ing this, but the fact is that a couple of more weeks is not going to magically produce the kind of sourcing this one needs to pass the notability bar... --IJBall (contribs • talk) 14:00, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Perhaps merely WP:TOOSOON, his leading role in a hit TV show that has been renewed for a 2nd season is an indication of potential notability.E.M.Gregory (talk) 14:50, 18 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This edit could be considered to be a deletion request from the article's author. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:47, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note I had actually considered that when I reverted that edit. However, I thought it was too ambiguous to warrant tagging for CSD G7. If he comes back and makes an unambiguous comment to that effect, I would be happy to tag for CSD G7. Safiel (talk) 00:18, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

changing my vote to keep. Rethinking partly because the 2nd season of that TV series is pending. But also because Peace Arch News appears to be a legit local/regional daily and in addition to a new article published a day ago [1], it ran a profile in June [2] from which an article can be sourced (in addition to the interview already on the page). He was 15 last summer, and it just seems to make sense to keep this article on a teen heartthrob whose fans have made him something of a deal on social media.E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:16, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That June 2016 profile contains this sentence: "an even bigger opportunity for Bogert – a lead role in a series for Family Channel that begins filming in Toronto this August (beyond those scant few facts, the producers insist on a media black-out on the project at this stage)."E.M.Gregory (talk) 20:25, 20 November 2016 (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.