Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Rae


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 10:50, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Jamie Rae

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

only claim to notability is a minor award for a trailer. not enough fo WP:CREATIVE. lacks coverage in independent sources. also has coi issues. Duffbeerforme (talk) 04:47, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

So a recognised award is not good enough for Wikipedia, no? How many awards have you won Duffbeerforme? No, didn't think so. 86.147.166.46 (talk) 21:31, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Absolutely. Jamie Rae is an award winner. I can pick hundreds and thousands of Wiki pages of people who aren't eligible for a page, yet on the occasion one is, it's proposed for deletion! No wonder I don't use Wiki except to complain! Grahampitt (talk) 21:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Grahampitt is the publicist for Cupsogue Pictures (afd), Gene Fallaize's production company who is involved in the production of Rae's existing work. The rest of his work is crystal ball (Let's Just Do It (2011)?) The IP stinks like a sock. To answer the socks question, I have won more than one award. One for drinking quicker than the few other people competing, an award that obvious did not make me notable. Other similarly superficial awards, giving me a similar lack of notability. Most awards do not make people notable. Another award I have won is a notable national award with it's own article here on Wikipwedia. The difference is despite that award which means I pass the definition of notable I have not made an article for myself. Read WP:COI. Duffbeerforme (talk) 14:13, 10 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 05:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable. Work on a couple of non-notable features, a non-notable award, some projects in production.  Might be notable in the future.  Insufficient reliable source coverage.  Baileypalblue (talk) 06:18, 11 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Not notable and over half of the listed projects are possible ones in the future. Might deserve a page one day, but not today. Alberon (talk) 10:17, 11 February 2009 (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.