Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Quitmeyer


 * 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. Staxringold talkcontribs 00:14, 26 October 2009 (UTC)

David Quitmeyer

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

It appears that the subject requests deletion. The presumption is that we would accede to these if the individual is only marginally notable. The article has only one independent source and a trawl through Google indicates that most mentions are either cast listings or directory entries, I did not find any non-trivial independent sources primarily about the subject. Given that the claim to notability is as an originator of "splatter porn" the number of Google hits is remarkably small. This does look like one of those marginal cases; the article either needs vastly better sourcing or removal I think. Guy (Help!) 21:53, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. I noted that the IP number that tagged the article for speedy deletion had made a note indicating that he was the subject and that he wanted the article removed, but I am not sure that that's solid enough ground for me to be sure the IP equals the subject.  I found three interviews with small online cinemazines,  and  that seem to indicate that he has sought the public's attention in the past.  Who is a low profile individual suggests that such an individual is not "low-profile, regardless of whether or not they are notable", but it means that this isn't a case of WP:BLP1E.  I also note that WP:OPTOUT, which was an attempt to generate policy about such a request, did not receive the blessing of the community.  I recognize competing interests here, but on the balance of probabilities I want to agree with User:Jayron32, who said (on the administrator's noticeboard area where I asked for policy references, here) that "If a person readily gives interviews to reliable sources, self-promotes their work, or otherwise personally seeks the public spotlight, then there is little ground to stand on when they claim they don't want an article at Wikipedia. For those sorts of people, what they are really after is to control their own message, and not privacy in any way."  (And thank you to Guy for taking the trouble to AfD this; I was waiting to hear from the IP user, but I think this is the way to get the community's opinion.) Accounting4Taste: talk 22:34, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I would not be averse to this ending early and the article deleted; my assessment seems to be distinctly in the minority. Accounting4Taste: talk 21:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Quitmeyer is only notable for making Slaughter Disc, and would normally be dealt with on that page per WP:BLP1E. However a quick read of Slaughter Disc suggests that the film may also be non-notable (no independent sources) and it seems likely that the coverage in Rue Morgue, Fangoria et al is limited entirely to reviews.  So, in short, Quitmeyer fails WP:N and someone should put his film up for AfD as well. - DustFormsWords (talk) 22:49, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Only found one newspaper article that may or may not be for the same person (it's pay-per-view and I can't get the details). The article is only about a controversial arrest, not related to his career or anything notable. --  At am a  頭 00:26, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per lack of sources; self-request for deletion is largely moot here, since there does not appear to be much in the way of reliable sources to build an article around, a few marginal bloggy-type interviews online, but not much else. -- Jayron  32  04:19, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * In interest of full disclosure, I was alerted to this AFD based on a discussion with another user, and based on a discussion at WP:AN. -- Jayron  32  04:20, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, just edit conflicted with you for almost identical logic. Huh. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * delete Does not meet WP:BIO. Considerations of his personal preference and how much weight to give his desire not to have an article don't need to be discussed. JoshuaZ (talk) 04:21, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Doesn't meet the GNG. RMHED   21:11, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Only one reliable source, not enough to establish notability. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 21:18, 20 October 2009 (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.