Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Smith (performer)

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 no consensus. relisting yet again is too much of a good thing. It looks like there is genuinely no consensus to delete here. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 12:07, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Smith (performer) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

No independent nobility - perhaps a redirect target to Whose Line Is It Anyway?. Youreallycan (talk) 01:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:07, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:10, 22 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 12:33, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Fairly harmless page, but notability not established. V. difficult to find any good sources owing to the name of the artist. Maybe I'm biased against any article that contains an incorrect use of the word "legendary". Tigerboy1966 (talk) 17:42, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Agree that sources are difficult to find, but that's no reason to delete. I've gone ahead and added two. He's been in newspapers, is listed on IMDB, and has worked with notable performers, that's enough for me. --Elonka 17:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I could be wrong, but I don't think IMDB is enough to establish notability, as it lists everyone indiscriminately.Tigerboy1966 (talk) 18:53, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Correct, it's not enough by itself to establish notability, but in combination with the other sources (and I'm confident that I could find more), it helps in combination. --Elonka 15:21, 31 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bryce (talk | contribs) 00:51, 9 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Sources do exist. Here's a Google search that lists several.[1] --Elonka 00:43, 16 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Well done for finding the sources but I'm afraid we have hit another problem. (Please note that I'm not just being awkward about this!). Notability requires some depth of coverage, and that's very difficult to do when a book search only has "snippet" views available: I know this because I have hit the same problem with some of the articles I have started. Tigerboy1966 (talk) 01:54, 16 January 2012 (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.