Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lee Paul

Source: 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 keep. Keep, albeit borderline no consensus. Either way, there isn't a consensus to delete the materials. Star Mississippi 02:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Lee Paul

Lee Paul (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)

Fails

WP:NACTOR. Just a journeyman with no breakthrough roles. Clarityfiend (talk) 06:28, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 06:49, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, plicit 12:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria says:

    People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject.

    • If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability; trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not usually sufficient to establish notability.
    The combination of all the "multiple independent sources" I provided demonstrates that the subject passes Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria.

    The 1,246-word Los Angeles Times article calls the subject "Actor Lee Paul" and "young Paul Lee Kroll", states he received "a bachelor of science in petroleum studies", says he is "5 feet, 17 1/2 inches" (which is 6 feet 5 1/2 inches), and states he is from Brooklyn. The Evening Standard article calls him "Paul Lee Kroll", says he is "6ft. 6in.", and states he is "a petroleum engineer from Brooklyn". The two articles are about the same person. I don't think that the McFarland & Company-published Obituaries in the Performing Arts, 2019's coverage of non-notable performers detracts from its contributing to notability of Lee Paul under Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria as one of the sources that is "combined to demonstrate notability".

    Cunard (talk) 09:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. I wasn't down with this until I read in the LA Times that Lee Paul and Paul Lee Kroll were one and the same. The article from the LA Times [2] is definitely
    significant coverage. The article from the London newspaper [3] is definitely SIGCOV. The book mentions, etc. are icing on the cake. Jacona (talk) 12:42, 10 May 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 ). No further edits should be made to this page.