Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathan Shaw

Add links
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. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 00:40, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nathan Shaw

Nathan Shaw (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable actor lacking in-depth, non-trivial support. Appears to be

WP:TOOSOON. reddogsix (talk) 16:26, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:35, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 16:35, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
What makes thelovelygrace.blogspot.co.uk a credible source? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 17:44, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There are MANY pages on Wikipedia with far fewer sources. I have included plenty of credible sources that show notability. Just because I included 2 blogspot pages doesn't discredit the others.Makro (talk) 17:59, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Other pages have no bearing on this AfD. reddogsix (talk) 18:26, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I was just pointing out a fact. The user claims no sources provide proof of notability when they do. Notability is proven from various sources. Makro (talk) 19:12, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Makro: Name two. Chris Troutman (talk) 19:13, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
(
WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is worth a read as well, regarding what other articles say compared to this one. —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap shit room 19:17, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@Serial Number 54129: I beg to differ. I believe the sources to be reliable (especially the news sources). Also to point out the YouTube source simple proves his YouTube channel of work. Just like it is a reliable source for every YouTube performer on Wikipedia. If it isn't reliable her then EVERY YouTuber who has a wiki should not have YouTube as a source.Makro (talk) 20:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Addition. It should remain so it can grow. So that other editors can add to it. The only way Wikipedia works is for everyone to add.Makro (talk) 11:59, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fails

WP:NACTOR. The article’s claim that he “got his big break” by “starring” in Vampire Academy is fanciful seeing as how he wasn’t even credited for his fleeting appearance. --Pawnkingthree (talk) 23:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]

@Pawnkingthree: Actually if you read the article I wrote supporting role and if you check the IMDB page for Vampire Academy he is credited. Makro (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No, it said starring and I corrected it. And here is the IMDB link - note “Nathan Shaw - Dhampir (Uncredited)” toward the bottom. Pawnkingthree (talk) 00:09, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Pawnkingthree: If you've seen his IMDB then you clearly know he has notability enough for a WIKI page.Makro (talk) 11:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • IMDB is generally not considered a reliable source -
    WP:RS/IMDB. reddogsix (talk) 15:36, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
    ]
No, people in the entertainment industry have access. They don't provide any proof to make edits. Because it's crowd-sourced like Wikipedia, it fails
WP:SPS. Chris Troutman (talk) 17:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
IMDB has been widely been regarded as an unsuitable source for years. See
WP:CITEIMDB. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:23, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply
]
@Justlettersandnumbers: I do not have any connection. I just try and create pages for people that are missing from Wikipedia.Makro (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I used a tried and tested method of putting the two pages into separate windows side-by-side and firing random phrases into the search bar while looking, and while a few half-sentences lined up, it doesn't look like a blatant cut and paste job. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 00:15, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I was thinking of stuff like "professional dance and musical theatre at the Phil Winston's Theatreworks in Blackpool". It's not really conceivable that two distinct authors would have chosen those exact words, nor that they should both independently have chosen to mix the American spelling "program" and UK spelling "honours". Anyway, I wonder where he'd have gone if he'd wanted to study unprofessional dance? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 12:34, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
A nightclub? The sentence fragment you mentioned was one of the ones I was thinking about; I've copyedited it anyway to be on the safe side - plus it gets rid of tautologies like "for 3 years from 2007 to 2010". Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:42, 25 March 2018 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nathan_Shaw&oldid=833345943"