Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chase Whiteside


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:23, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Chase Whiteside

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails notability guidelines - two of the sources are self-published, the other doesn't mention him at all. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 14:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC) Created for IP by  GB fan  14:20, 10 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - I've taken out the sources that were there before and added one which did have in-depth coverage of the subject. However, one source does not a notable person make. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:33, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:41, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep the news accounts cited in the article are significant enough. Advocate.com is not self published, and is a good RS. The Vanity Fair though not extensive is also acceptable.  DGG ( talk ) 23:23, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Second relist rationale. The article is a BLP. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Create an article for New Left Media and merge this article into it. New Left Media is certainly notable, they've been profiled by the Washington Post and Film Threat, along with various trivial mentions in other mainstream media outlets. The notability of the nominated article, which features one of the creators of the organisation, is dubious, but the organisation is notable.--hkr Laozi speak  00:26, 25 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete coverage is for an investment firm of the same name but not much else. . LibStar (talk) 06:41, 27 October 2010 (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.