Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethan Clerc


 * 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.

AfDs for this article: 

The result was no consensus. (No prejudice against speedy renomination per low participation herein.) North America1000 00:28, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Ethan Clerc

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not notable student film maker. Outside the indiscrimitate local press he lacks coverage about him in multiple independent reliable sources. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:00, 3 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep WP:GNG holds that "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list." Significant coverage is defined as when the sources address the subject directly and in detail and are not a trivial mention.  This is the case for all of the news articles used in the article.  You describe the press as "indiscriminate" and local; however, while the two articles from the Citizen are examples of local press, the articles from the Daily Globe, Marshall Independent, and KEYC are all large regional publications/media outlets.  While Clerc is based within the circulation area of both the Citizen and the Daily Globe, neither of the other two publications circulate there. , could you elaborate on which aspect of WP:GNG you feel this article does not meet? Ryan Vesey 03:41, 8 March 2017 (UTC)
 * To add to this, prior to creating the article, I ran this information by to get a second opinion regarding the subject's notability.  If he is around, perhaps he could elaborate as to why he also felt the subject met the notability guidelines. Ryan Vesey 03:47, 8 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kurykh (talk) 01:22, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
 * All from nearby down in the SW of Minnesota. Marshall Independent? Marshall, Minnesota, population 13-14,000. Papers circulation ~5,000. Large publication? I live in a larger town and see how indiscriminate our local paper is, not just the town but the region. Reading their article and that of the local affiliate KEYC read as very local puff, Young Windom this, Windom that, checkout what this local student is doing. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:43, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947  18:16, 16 March 2017 (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.