Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Isaak Presley


 * 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. Patar knight - chat/contributions 14:01, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Isaak Presley

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Recent article creation by now blocked socker. Challenged WP:BLPPROD. Fails not just WP:NACTOR, but looks to fail WP:GNG outright – only mentions at Deadline and TVLine are in relation to Stuck in the Middle (TV series) (i.e. passing mentions), and nothing at the more mainline sources like Variety, THR, EW, LA Times, etc. WP:TOOSOON. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 19:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Geraldo Perez (talk) 20:21, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep the univision source referenced in the article is reliable. May well pass WP:NACTOR for the criteria of having a large fan base, for example the page view statistics for the article over the past 30 days average at 336 a day which is quite incredible- if wikipedia was a business this would be one of the last pages to be deleted. Atlantic306 (talk) 20:28, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Good lord you're awful at this. Please quote WP:NACTOR back to us, . --IJBall (contribs • talk) 20:43, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Even more arrogant and condescending than usual. WP:NACTOR criteria 2 " Has a large fan base or a significant cult following." It couldn't be more plain, only one criteria needs to be passed. You are trying to delete very popular pages Atlantic306 (talk) 21:00, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * My attitude can be explained by you not learning from past mistakes at AfD. Once again, the extent of sourcing is what determines whether a role qualifies for "cult status". There is zero sourcing demonstrating this here. All your page view stats demonstrate (and 330+ page stats is not particularly impressive – page views in the thousands would be more significant) is that Stuck in the Middle the series has generated interest – you have utterly failed to demonstrate that Presley is independently notable or independently generating interest. Indeed, the lack of press and media coverage of him rather demonstrates that he hasn't. Finally, "popularity" is not a determining factor in whether articles are kept – quoting WP:Notability (people): ""Notable" in the sense of being "famous" or "popular" – although not irrelevant – is secondary." What determines notability is being "...significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded" in multiple independent reliable sources. Which isn't the case here. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:10, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Presley is pushing towards the limit of notability, but as a minor we need clear passing that limit before we should create an article. We do not have that yet. If the shows he is currently involved in get major traction we will at some future points maybe have enough sources to pass notability requirements, but we do not at present.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:35, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as there's still nothing at all for any actual convincing notability, we all know those works were as trivial as his current filmography is thus nothing convincing. SwisterTwister   talk  07:30, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
 * The above deletion debate is preserved as an archive of the discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the talk page of either this nomination or the nominated user). No further edits should be made to this page.