Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luke Barnett

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. Article improved during the course of the discussion. (non-admin closure) | Uncle Milty | talk | 16:54, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Luke Barnett[edit]

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

No evidence of significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions. Assertions of notability in article not verified, no significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Shirt58 (talk) 15:50, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 00:38, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Abstain due to article redone. Original delete rationale: Best known as lead in Growing Up With Gosling, which received some attention such as LA Times and Washington Post. The LA Times called him an "unknown actor". The WaPo because he is local to the area (looks like a syndication of the Maryland Gazette story). Not a bad start but not enough for WP:NACTOR or WP:GNG per nom. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 01:23, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as non-notable. I can't find any sources. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:26, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ehh, it looks significantly better now, but half of those sources don't look reliable. Some of the others look trivial. But I guess it's not as clear-cut as it used to be. I'm ambivalent now, leaning toward keep. I guess I didn't know what to search for. Good work saving the article. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 06:27, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"half of those sources don't look reliable" -- Could you please clarify? By my count, 75% of them are either known news sources or else direct links to official cast lists, official festival selections/awards, or official sites of particular films/plays. Softlavender (talk) 07:03, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. He's most famous for his various Funny or Die episodes that he's written and starred in, not only the Growing Up With Gosling, but also including among others this celebrity Kickstarter spoof and this spoof of Sorkin's The Newsroom, both of which have gotten a lot of airplay and commentary around the web. I've found a dozen notable national references on him and his various activities, and I think I could scrap and redo the article as a decent Wiki article. I think given the fact that he's a writer, actor, producer, and comedian, all combined (with press coverage) create a sufficient notability. Softlavender (talk) 01:51, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

a dozen notable national references .. great look forward to seeing them. It's about the refs. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 05:20, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Found lots of national and international mentions. Have redone the article; will convert bare URLs now. Softlavender (talk) 09:31, 15 September 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, | Uncle Milty | talk | 11:53, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Note: The article has now been completely redone. Softlavender (talk) 12:34, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good research work finding sources. The article has still some unsourced claims, unreliable sources and puffing up the topic in places, but I withdrew my vote and won't contest. The total picture points towards notability. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 15:23, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I drew everything from the links, so nothing is unsourced. I can't see anything that's really puffed -- the only plaudits are direct quotes from reliable sources. Unless you mean "Barnett's writing and acting on Funny or Die films has netted him national and international attention." That could go if necessary; I just wrote it as a summational transition to get that FoD section going smoothly without an abrupt break. Or unless you mean some stuff like "opened a door" etc.? -- that's all from the linked sources but could be re-worded I guess. In terms of the phrase "was singled out by Backstage", that's quite true -- Barnett was the only actor Backstage commented specifically favorably on in its review of the play [EDIT: Well, no, I'm slightly mistaken, didn't see the slight praise for another cast member, so I'll change that]. Softlavender (talk) 00:38, 16 September 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.