Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danny Smith (writer)


 * 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   keep. -- Cirt (talk) 16:26, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Danny Smith (writer)

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Minimal notability. No sources found. Simply writing a few notable episodes of Family Guy doesn't translate to notability. Tagged for sources for over a year with none forthcoming. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 02:42, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Family Guy is awesome and may become iconic, and writing one episode is notable enough.--BenOneHundred (talk) 12:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Striking !vote made by sockpuppet; see Sockpuppet investigations/Mitchronson. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 12:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:12, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep etc etc etc. While the nominator was busy checking out the edit history of opposing voters, he somehow missed the fact that the subject has six Emmy nominations; while some of these are team nominations, at least one is for particular/individual achievement -- not to mention the fact that creating notable work is generally recognized as establishing notability for creative professionals. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete unless and until editors care to provide sourcing. Doniago (talk) 19:35, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak delete- notability is not measured by having a cool job and being good at it, but by significant coverage in reliable independent sources and I'm just not seeing it here. Reyk  YO!  03:51, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. The emmy nominations do it for me, though we do need additional sourcing. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:37, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep While nothing in the article is sourced, there seem to be enough claims of notability in terms of his role in the show to meet WP:CREATIVE: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work." However, WP:RS need to be supplied or this article may well end up on deletion row again. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:04, 8 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per 6 Emmy nominations. Good enough for me. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  04:21, 9 November 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.