Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Patrick Stuart


 * 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   keep. Courcelles 00:27, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

James Patrick Stuart

 * – ( View AfD View log )

No secondary sources found. All TV roles are unnamed/one-shot characters or "not starred" whatever that means, except as a non-notable character on the 1980 Galactica reboot. All film roles are very short. Perhaps the only role that may save him is The Penguins of Madagascar, but even there, Private is one of no fewer than seven lead characters and Joey is only a tertiary character. In any event, he doesn't meet WP:BLP since there are no secondary sources, and he's dangerously close to failing WP:ENT. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 18:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:ENT with a bullet. Extensive career over many years with many named and recurring roles, as well as Emmy Award nomination.  7 episodes of Galactica 1980 in role of Doctor Zee.  35 episodes of All My Children as Will Cortlandt. 7 episodes of The Simple Life as Greg Champlain. 4 episodes of Encore! Encore! as Claude Bertrand.  2 episodes of JAG as Father O'Rourke. 19 episodes of Andy Richter Controls the Universe as Keith. 3 episodes of Second Time Around as Derek.  8 episodes of CSI: Crime Scene Investigation as Attorney Adam Matthews.  6 episodes of Still Standing as Perry.  5 episodes of The Closer as Deputy D.A. Garnett, 4 episodes of Wolverine and the X-Men as Avalanche.  10 episodes of 90210 as Charles Clark.  42 episodes of The Penguins of Madagascar as Private... as well as several dozens of other televison shows as named characters. That the nom offered "dangerously close to failing WP:ENT" makes me feel and with respects, that he did not look before nominating.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 20:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Care to tell me how any of the so-called "sources" you dug up are non-trivial? All I see is not-even-a-full-sentence mentions along the lines of "James Patrick Stuart played Character X". You can't base a whole article on that! Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:01, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * With respects, I do not know what you "saw" in your searches, but you began this nomination with "no secondary sources found" and "...TV roles are unnamed/one-shot characters or "not starred". As reliable secondary sources were easily found, and as the actor has had many named signficant roles in notable productions... and many roles that were clearly not one-shots, your opening statement was patently incorrect.  And while trivial might apply if meeting the GNG through significant coverage were the only assertion of notability being made, it does not here... as the assertion for notability is through the actor's lengthy career meeting WP:ENT.  The presumption per ENT is that reliable sources exist that can verify that this actor has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.  And as such reliable sources do exist to verify the assertion, ENT is met. But interestingly, and also missed in your WP:BEFORE, is that there are indeed at least some articles offering more-than-trivial coverage.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 13:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:ENT can establish a presumption of notability. However, no topic is notable without significant coverage in independent reliable sources. That's doubly true for a BLP. - SummerPhD (talk) 05:18, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * The presumption through WP:ENT is that reliable sourcs exist that can verify the scope of the actor's career and that he has had significant roles in notable productions, and not that the actor must also meet the GNG.
 * There is a non-policy tendency for editors to demand significant coverage under WP:GNG as if it were the only criteria acceptable for showing notability... but it is not the only criteria, and if the GNG were the only criteria we were allowed to consider, there would be no reason for the subsidiary criteria to exist at all.
 * To clarify: WP:ENT is set for cases where significant coverage may be lacking, by allowing editors a reasonable presumption that an actor who has significant roles in notable productions may indeed be found notable if these roles can be properly verified in the reliable sources without it also and needlessly demanding that the verification must itself be significant coverage.
 * And in a BLP, information that is likley to be challanged may be considered for removal if it cannot be properly verified in a reliable source. But as reliable sources toward verification are present, we do not have a violation of WP:BLP...  and we do even have at least some significant coverage alowing some extended discussion of the individual and his career. To me, per policy and guideline, the keep seems a given.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 13:45, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * In terms of coverage, please see here and here. Silver  seren C 07:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:ENT is a guideline and "meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." WP:V and WP:BLP, however, are policy. The sources provided by Silver seren include a brief entry in the apparent blog www.serienjunkies.de and this, which gives a good bit of opinion about the character Stuart plays and virtually nothing about him. If your argument is that there are no sources that give substantial coverage but that we can cobble together the bits and pieces from sources like that (and trivial coverage like this, this and this), please say so. At the moment, I'm looking for sources with substantial coverage and not finding them. - SummerPhD (talk) 15:26, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * "Substantial coverage" has never been a policy or guideline mandate. With respects. my "argument" is that your argument is incorrect, as is that of the nominator who made some patently incorrect and easily refuted statements toward the actor and his many roles.  The AV Club article Silver seren offered goes far toward refuting the nominator's claim of insignificant roles by its showing the significance of a role in a notable production.  Trivial would apply only if the assertion was simply his meeting WP:GNG.  Again, an erroneous demand for substantial coverage, while laudable, is not per policy nor applicable guidelines, and his career can be verified in reliable sources... and THAT is per both policy and guideline.  The requirement that we be able to verify an assertion of significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions is not a violation of BLP... quite the opposite... it specifcally meets it.  Policies WP:V and WP:BLP ARE being followed, as well as the guideline of WP:ENT.  And that others are able and willing to improve the article is actually a pretty decent reason to allow its continued improvements over time and through regular editing.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 17:05, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep I have added some references to the article. The subject appears to be fairly notable, though he is admittedly often a supporting character. Nevertheless, he's fairly prolific in television and the sources in a search reflect this. Silver  seren C 07:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. Per Silver's added refs -- sufficient to reflect notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Epeefleche (talk • contribs) 19:46, December 10, 2010
 * I didn't want to put this comment up as a "keep" because I am not registered on wikipedia yet, and I do not know if it is appropriate to do so, but I would support the above people who favor keeping this article. I have seen him in more than a few things now, although often as a supporting character (although I appreciate the additions to the page noted above, as they have helped me find more of him). Also, he does have a starring role in Andy Richter Controls the Universe, and I think this should add a good amount to his notability (and even though the show was cancelled after 2 seasons, it did have a fair amount of episodes, was on during prime time, and averaged over 7 million viewers). I think there are certainly better candidates than him to be removed from wikipedia (and I feel like we should probably err on the side of inclusion if anything, considering how useful wikipedia is for those looking for information on people). 138.88.156.182 (talk) 04:18, 12 December 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.