Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Cardelle

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. Sufficient consensus. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 03:53, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Cardelle[edit]

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

WP:BLP of an actor noted only for supporting and guest roles, and sourced only to a single unreliable "celebrity bio" database with no reliable source coverage shown. But even a claim that he satisfied the demands of WP:NACTOR, debatable but not entirely impossible here, would still have to be supported by reliable source coverage in media, and does not give any actor a no-sourcing-required notability freebie just because he exists. Delete, without prejudice against recreation in the future if this can be sourced properly. Bearcat (talk) 04:49, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 15:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 01:02, 20 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:04, 27 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, information has been added in the meanwhile on a prize and it is reliably (though weakly) sourced. I am not sure how significant the festival is, but may be we should take the person a bit more seriously.--Ymblanter (talk) 08:50, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - nothing in searches shows that he passes WP:GNG, and his resume doesn't show how he passes WP:NACTOR or WP:ENTERTAINER. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:38, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 23:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as still questionable for WP:ENTERTAINER. SwisterTwister talk 00:36, 14 March 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.