Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Cryan


 * 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. Eddie891 Talk Work 17:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

David Cryan

 * – ( View AfD View log )

BLP of a script writer to which WP:BLP1E applies. Mccapra (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Mccapra (talk) 12:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete we have insufficient sourcing to show a passing of GNG.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:57, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, not enough coverage for WP:GNG, and too few credits to warrant having an article.  PK T (alk)  14:26, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Firstly, television writers are not automatically entitled to Wikipedia articles the moment they've had one writing credit — the notability test for television writers is evidence of significance, such as getting an Emmy or Canadian Screen Award nomination for their writing, not just evidence of existence. Secondly, he hasn't actually written real episodes of either Veep or Curb Your Enthusiasm: those were spec scripts that he sent to the Simpsons as writing samples, not episodes that either of those series actually filmed or aired — so neither of those shows are relevant to his notability or lack thereof at all, because he does not actually have genuine writing credits on either show. Thirdly, the notability test is also not passed just because the person gets a tiny blip of "local guy does stuff" in his own local media; note as well that the IFP.ca and Toronto Star hits are the same article by the same journalist, but the same content being reaggregated in two sister publications co-owned by the same company is one data point toward GNG, not two separate ones (see WP:CITEKILL, specifically the section titled "Reprints"). So no, writing one actually-produced-and-actually-aired episode of one TV series is not automatically enough in and of itself, and neither the volume nor range of coverage he got for it add up to enough to get him over WP:GNG in lieu of having to achieve anything that would pass our actual notability tests for television writers. If he gets an Emmy nomination in the fall for it, then maybe things will be different. Bearcat (talk) 15:34, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Bearcat's good assessment. PK650 (talk) 23:14, 27 March 2021 (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.