Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Bayne

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. A

WP:BLP with zero reliable sources after three weeks of AfD gets an automatic delete. Can be recreated with proper sourcing, if there is any. Sandstein 07:00, 17 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Doug Bayne

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

Deletion: as unsourced, purely OR-based promotional page. Quis separabit? 05:39, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. While the references are poor and the article worse, I believe he is notable for his contributions to Platinum Grit, Oglaf, Double the Fist and The Chaser. Doctorhawkes (talk) 06:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 12:02, 27 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Weakish keep Certainly the article needs a rewrite with proper referencing. I easily and quickly saw a reasonable but light number of independent sources of a range of reliability from official government sites to almost the other end of the spectrum. There are reviews and mentions of him and his work not just in English but other languages so the subject is known internationally too. I think there is sufficient
WP:TNTed and redone from scratch. Aoziwe (talk) 03:12, 28 October 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete The article has a total lack of reliable sources. This is not an acceptable thing for a biography of a living person. IMDb seeks to be a comprehensive listing of everyone ever appearing in film, we do not.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 05:25, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unsourced BLP. the keep !votes have used a
WP:MUSTBESOURCES argument. LibStar (talk) 04:30, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply
]

Hmmm. I do not believe I have. I did actually look. I did find a non trivial number of sources, and like I said above they were of varying quality. But yes certainly not a solid keep. Regards. Aoziwe (talk) 11:56, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Linguist

^unEins ^uno 13:59, 10 November 2017 (UTC)[reply

]

Delete Poorly-written promotional piece, immediately evidenced by "known for his exploits" in the header. An animated work he created has gained minor third-party press (HuffPost, The Australian), but it's not enough to establish notability as he's otherwise just mentioned in passing everywhere else.
^{• whaddya want? •} 17:56, 10 November 2017 (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.