Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Wayne Williamson


 * 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. Daniel (talk) 02:02, 2 August 2021 (UTC)

Doug Wayne Williamson

 * – ( View AfD View log )

BLP does not meet notability thresholds: supporting roles as actor do not pass WP:NACTOR and notability is not inherited from co-founding the Esquires coffee shop chain. MrsSnoozyTurtle 08:07, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:02, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 12:03, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Oppose The article cites a number of reliable sources and acts as a useful collection of information from a regional perspective. I think the article should be reduced to a stub as an alternative to deletion. Michaeltyu (talk) 01:13, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Stubbing is not an "alternative to deletion". If a person or thing clears our notability criteria at all, then their article is always allowed to be as long or as short as the depth of what the sources enable us to say — but there's no such thing as "notable enough to keep a stub but not notable enough to justify adding to it any further". Bearcat (talk) 14:15, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 10:10, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. The sourcing is not solid enough to get Williamson over WP:GNG — his acting is sourced solely to his IMDb profile, which is not a source that helps to establish the notability of an actor, and the stuff about the coffeeshop is sourced entirely to specialist franchising industry newsletters, most of which just briefly namecheck Doug Williamson as a giver of soundbite in an article that is not about him. And of the just two sources that are actually about him in any non-trivial way, both come from specialist franchising business newsletters which aren't widely distributed enough to bring the GNG all by themselves if they're the best sourcing he has — they'd be fine for use amid a mix of much more solid sourcing, but they don't magically clear the bar all by themselves if they are the most solid sources on offer. Neither actors nor businesspeople are automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just for having jobs per se, and nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have any better references than this. Bearcat (talk) 14:15, 27 July 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.