Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Fantini
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 Delete. Fails the GNG badly, and arguably fails
]Michael Fantini
- Michael Fantini (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Apparently most notable for several guest spots as "Adam Berman" on talk) 14:57, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the talk) 15:06, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the talk) 15:08, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I can't find anything resembling reliable sourcing. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 15:48, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment his career as voice artist work adds to meeting WP:ENT with 13 episodes of Garbage Pail Kids, 13 episodes of ALF: The Animated Series, and 13 episodeds of Sylvanian Families, among others. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 09:21, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment WP:ENT is intended to supply guidelines for situations in which a personality is likely to have reliable sourcing, right? I don't dispute that this individual exists and has had some roles, I just can't find any coverage of him. I'd be happy to change my vote to keep (of course) if anybody else has more success finding actual sources. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 20:30, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Well... the body of his work is body of work and not instead for wide coverage of the individual, as ENT encourages finding those reliable sources (as above) confirming his works. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 00:15, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you provide some kind of policy backing for what you're asserting here? To say that WP:ENT is essentially indicated to predict notability, not guarantee it. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡbomb 05:39, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- My argument is made per policy WP:Vand consensus reached through discussions and AFDs and talkpages and noticeboards for several years. ENT and GNG are not exclusionary. Meeting one OR the other can be enough to allow consideration of notability. An actor with a brief career might recieve wide coverage in multiple reliable sources and merit inclusion through the GNG even though his short career might fail ENT. That does not exclude him. An actor might have an career that spans decades and have "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions", and merit inclusion through meeting ENT. Even if he otherwise maintains a low profile and fails GNG by not having wide coverage in popular press, that "low profile" does not exclude him. One need not meet both guidelines. ENT is no more predictive than is the GNG itself, as guideline well acknowledges that not eveything that is notable makes headlines.
- To expand (hope folks do not see this as TLDR), guideline at WP:ENTallows that notability may be considered if the actor has "had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" but does not mandate that the subject must also meet the GNG.
- And again, while all guideline criteria absolutely require meeting policy WP:V, it is no where mandated that a topic "must" also meet the predictive GNG. It is the verification of any assertion in reliable sources that is mandated... and notability does not always depend the depth of coverage of the topic or the individual. So with respects, a topic missing out on meeting the GNG is not the final nail in the coffin. Notability is not always a contest to see who is more popular in press coverage. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 19:56, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- My argument is made per policy
- Can you provide some kind of policy backing for what you're asserting here? To say that
- Well... the body of his work is
- Comment
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Darkwind (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:36, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply
- Delete - can only verify in databases... need secondary sources to meet Wikipedia's guidelines. Arskwad (talk) 07:02, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No, we don't. Primary sources are fine, the credits of these series, if there is no possible reason to doubt the information. Dream Focus 15:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Very notable voice actor, obviously. Look at the list of things this person has been in! Dream Focus 15:24, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. More notable than a breadbox. The relative notability can be questioned, but it meets the standards to stay here. tedder (talk) 06:47, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per my discussion above. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 23:09, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per talk 00:57, 20 May 2010 (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.