Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Philip Daniel Bolden

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:14, 22 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Philip Daniel Bolden[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)

Article makes no credible claim of significance, nor are there any sources in the article that meet the mandatory requirements for a biography. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:43, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:55, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:56, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 21:57, 12 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete cannot find any RS that give significant coverage to him (t · c) buidhe 12:38, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Actor has made significant appearances in movies in televison shows, I won't mind reasearching for reliable sources on the actor. Deleting this actor's page will leave lot of redlinks and empty links all over pages where this actor is featured. This stub barely gets attention from editors and is a example of WP:PNA. I suggest finding more sources the article has WP:HASPOT to be improved. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 13:24, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I have found no significant coverage about the subject. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. Less Unless (talk) 17:57, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Less Unless Comment, Did you actually do your research? I found a reliable source from the New york times in less than a minute and I added to the page. This actor also does't fail guideline one of WP:NACTOR, "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions." Bolden has have roles in over 20 movies and Televison shows combined and is still active, He without a doubt passes GNG. This article does need more citations though. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 18:34, 13 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:SomeBodyAnyBody05 Of course I did. I have looked through 7 Google pages and all I see is user generated sources with no actual coverage - just mentions of him playing several roles or wiki mirrors. Can you please provide the NYT link you found? As for the WP:NACTOR] - "multiple notable films" - again - multiple and notable. To me personally his filmography is far from that. If you happen to find significant coverage on him, please do add it to the article. Best,Less Unless (talk) 18:21, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:Less Unless, Here's the source fro the new york times talking about his role in the 2008 film Fly me to the Moon where the 3d genre was being reviltalized in the early to late 2000's source. I'm sure I can find more as User:Dflaw4 found an reliable source as well on a upcoming role. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 13:56, 16 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it doesn't discuss any of that. It's a puff piece that makes exactly two mentions of the artist as a cast member. There isn't anything in that source that comes close to meeting WP:NACTOR. Thera re no sources for the fimlography or awards section, IMBd is not considered a reliable source so it's use as an external link is inconsequential here, and literally everything save but for the mention of fly me to the moon has no source. Literally every linked media project in his filmography section also fails to list the actor as a main character in the template save but for Are We Done Yet, and that's not cited in this article as it were so the potentially strongest claim for keep is noticeably absent. To me, the essay Wikipedia:Who is a low-profile individual comes into play here, as the subject has been covered but frankly not that well - at least not if our existing article is to be believed. TomStar81 (Talk) 20:20, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@User:TomStar81, So you still think that's a excuse for your harsh and narrow take of failing WP:NACTOR? This actor has over 20 credits in the field of Film and television being one of the main characters in Are We There Yet and he is still active to date. Debunking one source is not enough to delete an entire well enough notable actor's page. And the article still mention the subject enough to pass under WP:GNG.This actor has a way more debatable argument than Aleisha Allen. And even if this source doesn't cut it I featured a magazine source that centers around Bolden, Allen and other cast memebers' roles in Are We There Yet from Jet magazine, check the subject's article if you're intrested. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 22:55, 18 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two drive by mentions - one in a photo caption - do not a demonstrate notability to me. While its true they are mentioned, the question I have that you still haven't answered is "why should we care?" Quite frankly, from where I sit, according to the article and the sources present at this time, we shouldn't care. Ultimately then, guess we'll have to agree to disagree. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:21, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Why should we care?" Are you serious? We're in a deletion discussion that you created where your rationale is the CSD A7 claim about no credible claim of significance when I provided you not one but two reliable sources confirming the roles themselves that fall under WP:HASREFS, and I can give you more. What do you think you're going to find,A in-depth interview with the actor that went on Hiatus for a entire decade? And the fact you're still trying to defend your already debunked point is wild. That's already a good start to get two reliable sources for a stub page thatonly recieve 9 edits in the 6 months before to you nominated the page for deletion albeit 5 of those edits being from myself. The fact of the matter is that Wikipedia is a project, And the point is to care to make stub articles like these better and improve them before nominating them for deletion as last resort. You're supposed to do that. Agree to disagree. ₛₒₘₑBₒdyₐₙyBₒdy₀₅ (talk) 13:26, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I don't see any problem in terms of WP:NACTOR, given the subject's roles in films like Are We There Yet? and Are We Done Yet?. The main issue seems to be WP:SIGCOV. But, he won a Young Artists Award, so if that is enough for WP:ANYBIO, then it trumps WP:GNG. If the article remains, I'd suggest adding this source regarding his most recent role: https://deadline.com/2020/09/millennials-umc-cast-1234581571/. Dflaw4 (talk) 12:45, 14 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NACTOR and Dflaw4. He co-starred in two major comedic films. Like the Oscars, we have to be aware of bias against comedies. Bearian (talk) 17:35, 17 November 2020 (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.