Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Winslow Fegley

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. (non-admin closure) NemesisAT (talk) 13:33, 14 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Winslow Fegley (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Actor does not meet WP:NACTOR, let alone WP:BASIC. Need to prove it meets these, not just invoke them. Additionally, three of the four references WP:NOTRS. I would also support converting this to a draft. But it definitely should not be in mainspace as it stands. Amaury • 17:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Television. Amaury • 17:35, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment – Currently way, way too undersourced to demonstrate WP:BASIC. Let's see if others can come up with enough sources here to demonstrate notability. I am skeptical. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 17:57, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment 8 Bit Christmas certainly qualifies as a major role[1], uncertain about the others. Lyle[2] absolutely will when it is out. Artw (talk) 18:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Significant role" as per WP:NACTOR has to be proven, and the way that's proven is with significant coverage. It's not about cast listing order – it's about whether a role generates significant secondary coverage. We've had cases before where someone arguably "technically met WP:NACTOR", but the article was still deleted at WP:AfD because those roles got no significant coverage (so WP:BASIC was failed). --IJBall (contribs • talk) 18:30, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Sounds a bit redundant to general then, TBH. Artw (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

      Meeting WP:NACTOR means it's likely that WP:BASIC will be met, but not certain – it's not a guarantee. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:13, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep have added refs. Artw (talk) 21:17, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Ref #7 is the only one of those that can probably be considered "significant" coverage. The rest are passing mentions, or worse garbage like the IMDb "ref". Still looks well short of WP:BASIC. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 01:12, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Going to disagree with you there. Also have replaced the imddb ref (not one I added, FWIW). Artw (talk) 13:47, 23 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:09, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 01:43, 7 July 2022 (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.