Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Keaton


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:00, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Harry Keaton

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I am also nominating the following related page for the same reason:

The sister and younger brother of Buster Keaton do not have any major acting credits. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:48, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete on both accounts. An extra in a few movies does not an actress make, no sources, and as notability is not inherited...--Fbifriday (talk) 07:00, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. --OpenFuture (talk) 07:44, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:BIO. Dr. Blofeld       White cat 10:43, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:03, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Very tough to make a flat declaration here in 2010 that roles in pre-intenet 1930's and 50's films are significant to those films or not, as there is a cinematic history to consider and notability in the 30's is still notability per WP:NTEMP. Naturally, Harry being related to Buster will be part of many of these 133 news articles of Harry from the 30s until the present, and in these 101 books.  And another consideration is that while Louise is in fewer news articles,, she is in more books..  Personally, I believe that in these cases, sources allow a presumption of notability per WP:GNG and the articles (and project) will benefit from them being expanded and properly sourced... specially as these are not WP:BLP1E nor a violation or WP:NOT.  Barring that, a merge to Buster's article should at the least be itself considered.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:00, 5 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Okay... okay... I'll get to it and report back.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 01:02, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge both and redirect to Buster Keaton, as both Harry and Louise have plenty of available sources (and yes, many are in context to familial relationship to Buster). Considering that both Harry and Louise are part of citable cinematic history, and this extensive sourcing seems to meet WP:GNG, it would be a shame to let this information vanish from Wikipedia simply because these two had a much more notable brother.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q.
 * More: Some of the earliest news articles do not so much deal with Harry's film work, but conentrate rather on a bit of a scandal, where Harry had even while acting, for several years used the fame of the Keaton family name to support running an acting school/casting agency during the early 1920s. The acting school was determined to be a fraud, and Harry was convicted accordningly.  The conviction was appealed in 1930.  I could learn the results of the new trial, but do not wish to pay the $50 to find out.  Buster must have been mortified.  Harry did briefly join Buster in Florida in 1933, where Buster was about to shoot The Fisherman.  Harry was described as Buster's personal assistant.  Harry returned to California in 1934 and had parts in various films before and after WWII.  Quite an intriguing bit of history.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 14:41, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I note that the instructions at WP:ENT allow a "presumption" that then encourages editors to look for sources that meet the GNG and so might allow an individual to be determined notable. Though Harry's career pales when compared to that of his brother, his starring in film roles from 1919 encouraged me to look.  I found enough coverage so as to make me feel that both Harry and Louise merit inclusion in Wikipedia in some fashion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 14:51, 11 July 2010 (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.