Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jamie Williams (actor)


 * 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. joe deckertalk to me 01:39, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Jamie Williams (actor)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable child actor; no sources but IMDb. Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:00, 11 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 20:10, 12 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment An article lacking the inclusion of sources is always a concern, but not always a sound reason to delete. His work in significant roles in multiple notable productions is easily verifiable, and would thus meet WP:ENT. As this article was nominated for deletion only one hour and 3 minutes after its creation by a new editor, I'll have a hand at expansion and sourcing and report back.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 07:39, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You should also advise the article's creator that he needs to tell us where he got File:930848 pbrp.jpg from and add a licence or it's likely to be deleted. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:38, 25 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Now seems to pass WP:ENT and has been nominated/won some notable awards too.  Lugnuts  (talk) 08:14, 25 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This WP:BLP still contains no references to reliable independent sources.  Sandstein   07:08, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - a lack of sources for most subjects is not a ground for deletion but for BLP subjects it is. Also fails WP:BIO. The two 'awards' are not quite what they seem; the first is by a notable body but the award itself doesn't have its own page and therefore can't be said to be notable. The second 'award' was just a nomination and he failed to win the award. TerriersFan (talk) 16:41, 3 July 2011 (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.