Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Heimbuch


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 03:09, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Jeff Heimbuch

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

Not notable. Does not meet any of the criteria of WP:CREATIVE. Drawn Some (talk) 23:50, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
 * The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors.
 * The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique.
 * The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.
 * The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, or had works in many significant libraries.


 * Delete -, and are the same story in two different local presses, and he gets mentioned here.  That's not enough to establish ntoability. -- Whpq (talk) 17:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete  - Fails WP:CREATIVE. ttonyb1 (talk) 15:05, 7 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep and further source, specially as WP:CREATIVE was not written to address a new director... and seems to encourage waiting until their works themselves become historically notable. HOWEVER, since his works ARE becoming notable (The Ties That Bind (2009), Leeds Point (film), Elevator (2006)) and winning awrads and gaining recognition, as writer and director, that notability is his. It must also be rememberd that CREATIVE is only a sub-section or WP:PEOPLE and its basic criteria, whch he is just now passing. If a person meets these basic criteria, there is no need to follow in through the subsidiary criteria in order to find some way to exclude them... specially as he does not pass the "secondary considerations" of WP:POLITICIAN, WP:DIPLOMAT, WP:ATHLETE, or WP:ENTERTAINER either. In these cases, guideline advises looking at WP:N and WP:GNG, where a newcomer with growing notability is allowed consideration. Having (growing) articles on young writer/directors whose works are growing in recognition, improves wiki. Wiki allows that he is the sum of his parts.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 00:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - The "newness" of the director is not addressed by WP:CREATIVE because the "newness" is not relevant. If his work is recognized as stated in the guidelines, then he is notable regardless of his newness.  If it is not, then he needs to reach that level before being considered WP:NOTABLE.  You are suggesting to move the notability goalposts to include up-and-coming, which to my knowledge, has always been considered just short of meeting notability.  -- Whpq (talk) 14:32, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Let's please try to focus on whether or not there are sufficient in-depth resources available to establish notability and create a verifiable article. This is an unreferenced BLP. Drawn Some (talk) 03:10, 12 May 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.