Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Chiba Stearns


 * 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. The Bushranger One ping only 01:14, 3 February 2013 (UTC)

Jeff Chiba Stearns

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No reliable sources, tagged for notability for 5 years. Boleyn (talk) 20:43, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- Cameron11598  (Converse) 22:07, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Speedy keep #2 deletion spree. Unscintillating (talk) 03:42, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Nominating a large number of articles - all of which have been tagged for notability for at least 5 years - does not meet speedy keep no. 2. Boleyn (talk) 08:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Tending towards keep. The subject seems to get quite a bit of local news coverage around Vancouver and quite a lot of awards (some of which might help towards notability - but I'm not much good on any but the most major film awards) - but leaving these aside, I've been able to find three at least moderately in-depth discussions in apparently reliable sources of individual films: this of What Are You Anyways?, this of Yellow Sticky Notes, and this of One Big Hapa Family. To be honest, I'd like to see a bit more, but on the basis that what is important about an artist is their work, these discussions by themselves seem to bring the subject close to notability. PWilkinson (talk) 19:56, 18 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep: Very nearly speedy keep. He's made a bunch of films. They're exhibited at festivals, they're shown on television. It's a bit of a neglected page, but deletion won't improve it. Plenty of sources appear to by lying around Google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MarkBernstein (talk • contribs) 19:29, 20 January 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 01:11, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 04:04, 27 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep. Covered in reliable sources, winner of multiple prizes covered in reliable sources, discussed in a scholarly work. Passes GNG. --Arxiloxos (talk) 07:44, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep per analysis and comments of User:Arxiloxos showing reliable sources are available and lack of improvement for something ultimately improvable is not a valid rationale for deletion.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:47, 31 January 2013 (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.