Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nikolai Hood

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. -- Cirt (talk) 02:17, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nikolai Hood[edit]

Nikolai Hood (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested prod. As far as I have seen so far, the "young actor, director, and political activist" has provided no assertion of notability per our WP:Notability (entertainers) criteria. All of the references are to self-published blogs and links to YouTube video channels. A websearch provides nothing to suggest that Mr Hood meets any of the criteria; no IMDb page or filmography available, and the recent contested prod provided a self-written website stating "For those of you who don't know, Nikolai Hood is a renowned young actor, director and political activist." So, I suspect this is also an autobiography. Good luck to him, though, and I hope he finds enough success to have this page recreated at a later date, but not now. Bob talk 16:50, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The thing is, because you started the article, it's really up to you to find some sources which attest to why he should be included - just saying he's "a rising personality" and then providing lots of self-published sources isn't enough, as we work off facts. Anybody who has their own blog or has uploaded a video to YouTube could be included on Wikipedia under the current claim to notability - are there any newspaper articles/IMDb profiles or indy festival entries that attest to this "rising personality" claim? Bob talk 00:37, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Personally, I have only had "okay" success, and, though I hope for more, it is really up to the Wikipedia administrators to decide whether I am notable enough.NikolaiHood (talk) 00:29, 14 May 2011 (UTC) — NikolaiHood (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
    • No, it isn't up to the administrators. It's totally up to the sources. What are the independent sources- the newspapers, magazines, books, and so forth- that have written about you? If they say you're notable, the article stays. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 00:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Nikolai has contributed to the Alex Jones radio show, been features in a magazine article, and has attempted to uphold the comedic styles of a lost generation, and for these reasons, I believe that he is credible enough for his own Wikipedia article. Wclutterbuck (talk) 04:16, 14 May 2011 (UTC) William Clutterbuck - Account has no contributions outside of this debate, and may be a sockpuppet due to the same incorrect style of signing posts. Bob talk 08:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • The magazine is in print only —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.53.249.39 (talk) 02:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would say it is keepable if anyone can find independant magazine or news articles showing notability beyond the niche fans —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.247.194 (talk) 13:10, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • It really doesn't matter how many different accounts you create. If you can share good sources, then you only need one account to show the notability of yourself. If there are no good sources, there's no number of posts you can make here that will change that. Please, stop disrupting the discussion with multiple accounts. It cannot help you accomplish your goal. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 13:46, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
please do not make false accusations check my edit history and distinct location i am a wiki user from the uk, with no previous involvement in this and i would ask that you withdraw your accusation. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.112.247.194 (talk) 14:03, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This page is for discussion of the deletion of the article Nikolai Hood. Please explain what specific part of the notability criteria this person meets, and what reliable sources confirm that. No other comments are useful in this space. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 14:08, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Not good enough. Darkjedi10 (talk) 13:12, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The nobility criteria lists "significant cult following", which may be true in this case going off of some of the comments on this deletion log. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.102.81.114 (talk) 03:07, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, for now. Under our current policies, we just don't have enough independent material for an article - we rely too much on the subject's own sources, which calls the neutrality of the article into question. That said, the usual caveats apply here - Mr. Hood seems to be doing good work, and it's possible (perhaps likely) that we'll see work of sufficient prominence as to justify an article. We're not there yet, though, unfortunately. Also, a note to User:NikolaiHood - remember, we're not talking about you personally, just your article. Part of that is the coverage of your work so far, but a deletion here does not - and should not - reflect on you personally. For my part, good on you and best of luck. UltraExactZZ Said ~ Did 16:53, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - There is no coverage about Nikolai Hood in reliable sources. One editor indicated he has a small show at South by Southwest this year. I don't know what is meant by a small show, but he does not appear in the 2011 SXSW film lineup. -- Whpq (talk) 17:37, 16 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete for the time being re User:Whpq & User:FisherQueen. No notability in reliable sources, although this fellow is definitely interesting, and I hope he becomes notable to merit a return to Wikipedia. My personal interest in this is that David copperson added Hood to the "Influenced" list of the article Stanley Kubrick which I deleted as failing the Template:Infobox person criterion for notability, on May 13th. Today I considered adding text on Hood to the article, but found this discussion, and so I won't.--WickerGuy (talk) 14:55, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Nikolai Hood is not a rising film director or political activist. There are no reliable sources because he is only in the high school. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.227.243.189 (talk) 13:38, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Why is that a "keep" then? Bob talk 14:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I can find no evidence the subject satisfies the general notability guideline. Some fishiness afoot here. -- Rrburke (talk) 23:36, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Just delete it. I am not notable yet and the amount of defamatory edits are excessive. Please just remove the article until I merit nobility and try to find out whether user David copperson is just using this "sock puppetry", which I looked up, to somehow defame me.NikolaiHood (talk) 01:43, 20 May 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nikolai_Hood&oldid=1069822649"