Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Krae


 * 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. Bearcat is harshly admonished for colluding in secret plots without inviting the rest of us. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 02:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

David Krae

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

WP:BLP of a filmmaker, not properly sourced as having any strong claim to passage of WP:CREATIVE. The strongest notability claim here is that one of his films was screened at two minor film festivals and won an award at one of them, which is not an instant notability clincher all by itself in the absence of enough media coverage to clear WP:GNG. As always, our notability criteria are not automatically passed by just any film award that happens to exist -- they look for top-level national film awards like the Oscars, the BAFTAs or the Canadian Screen Awards, and internationally prominent megafestivals on the order of Cannes, Berlin or TIFF, but every award presented by every small film festival on the planet is not in and of itself an instant exemption from having to have solid sources. But other than the glancing namechecks of his existence in the news article about the Beverly Hills Film Festival awards and a non-notable blog's entry about the Canadian Filmmakers Festival's overall lineup, neither of which are about him strongly enough to clinch passage of GNG if they're the best sources that can be found, this is otherwise referenced entirely to directly affiliated primary sources (his own website, IMDB, the self-published website of the CFF, the Canadian Film and Television Producers Association and GoodReads) which are not support for notability at all. Nothing stated here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Also conflict of interest, as the article was created by an editor whose username matched the name of the subject's own production shingle. Bearcat (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Update: despite having not otherwise edited Wikipedia since 2008, the subject/creator of the article sent me a private e-mail within an hour of my initiating this discussion, both trying to contradict my assessment of this article and alleging that I and Wikipedia are colluding with the Canadian film industry in a plot to slander him. Yeah, no, not what's happening here. Bearcat (talk) 23:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 22:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete - He simply doesn't appear to be notable. As stated above, we don't have the coverage by reliable sources that we need for a proper page. Deletion seems to be the right call. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 00:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 00:22, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete a non-notable filmmaker.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:OUTCOMES, WP:MILL, and WP:SIGCOV. We ted to delete producers' articles, who are after all run of the mill. There's no reliable sources except for the Hollywood Reporter piece, which devotes a single sentence to him. Bearian (talk) 01:49, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courrecx (talk) 05:01, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete does not meet WP:BIO. Ericfood (talk) 07:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not enough third-party RS coverage to justify a BLP. Fails WP:GNG. (Also, why was this relisted prior to the 7-day mark and with a seemingly apparent consensus?) -- Kinu t/c 08:28, 28 April 2020 (UTC)
 * weak keep I think it does meet WP:BIO. He is producer or executive producer of films which feature bonafied stars.  It is not just one notable film he played a major role in producing and writing, there are multiple - A number of which have wikipedia articles of their own.  Where there's a problem is in the amount of indepth coverage about him specifically.  But don't producers of B movies generally receive less coverage after the films debut ?  He started off strong but hasn't done much in a while.  That doesn't take away from his earlier successes.Grmike (talk) 10:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)grmike


 * 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.