Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Sweet


 * 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   speedy delete - G3 - blatant hoax, non-admin closure RJaguar3 &#124;  u  &#124;  t  02:57, 18 August 2010 (UTC)

Daniel Sweet

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Prod removed by creator. It does say he won an award for 'Best newcomer', which I suppose asserts notability.... Chris (talk) 12:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails notability criteria for actots. 'Best newcomer' award doesn't indicate notability, as it is not known wheter the award is significant or not. I assume it is not. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  16:05, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. The award cannot be verified (the source is the Wikipedia disambig page Newcomer, which makes no mention of him), and he's not even listed on IMDB. --  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 16:11, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. He may become more notable later but not yet. Besides, it is effectively an unreferenced BLP as nothing listed under "References" is remotely relevant as a reference. --DanielRigal (talk) 16:18, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 17 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete If he had been in any of the TV shows mentioned he would have a listing on IMDb. The whole article is fishy as none of the links provided mention this person - three of them link to wikiarticles which cant be used as a source and the link to the Bristol School of Performing Arts takes us to a sight that is under construction. Another problem is that the 6th season of Dr Who is still in the planning stages and no guest actors have been cast. The article might be a hoax or it might be a self promotion. In either case it needs to go until proof that this 13 year old even exists. MarnetteD | Talk 21:44, 17 August 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.