Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brother Andy


 * 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 --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:36, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Brother Andy

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a person with no particularly strong claim of notability that would cleanly pass any of Wikipedia's subject-specific inclusion standards for people. Of the four sources here, one is a self-published résumé on a primary source, while two are to local community media outlets that would be valid for supplementary confirmation of facts after an article had already been sourced over GNG, but aren't widely distributed enough to count toward GNG. Which leaves only one source that's fully satisfactory — but one good source can't carry GNG alone if it's not actually supporting anything that would pass an SNG instead. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 00:59, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 01:15, 27 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:10, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Simply not enough coverage for a better notable article. SwisterTwister   talk  01:27, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete I was unable to find anything I would consider to be a wp:RS. LaMona (talk) 02:22, 3 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment While I am also not convinced of his notability, this glorified resume indicates that this actor has been inactive since 2003. This suggests that it is unlikely to find recent third-party sources. The only connection that even remotely indicates notability to me is his several years of association with Fangoria, though I am far from certain that the magazine's notability means its staff and associates are also notable. Dimadick (talk) 10:33, 3 January 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.