Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Schultz (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 redirect to North of Pittsburgh. Spartaz Humbug! 21:08, 28 April 2018 (UTC)

Jeff Schultz (actor)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Minor actor and writer, without proper sourcing. Appears to fail GNG and NACTOR. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ  03:25, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete not in any way enough references to show notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:57, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 07:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 07:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep and flag for cleanup, or redirect to North of Pittsburgh without prejudice against restoring an article in the future if and when better sources can be brought to bear. The strongest basis for notability here isn't his roles as an actor, but his Genie Award nomination as a screenwriter — this does need improvement, absolutely, but actually having a shortlisted nomination for a country's top level film award is an automatic notability pass in and of itself. I'll grant that not everybody else whose name appears in Canadian Screen Award for Best Screenplay has an article yet, mainly because I'm the only person actually undertaking any serious attempt to work on the problems with our historical CFA→Genie→CSA coverage, but everybody whose name appears in that list must be either a blue link or a potential future blue link. There can be no exceptions where a person who has a Genie nomination is permanently off limits as an article topic, because the nomination itself is grounds for inclusion right on its face. Bearcat (talk) 18:08, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   16:27, 13 April 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Weak keep. Real weak. I'm sympathetic to Bearcat's argument, but absent any sort of reliable, independent sources about Schultz, there's not much we can say about him in his own article. If coverage is largely due to his screenwriting for North of Pittsburgh, perhaps a redirect to that article until/unless sufficient sourcing is available? Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:59, 13 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 09:18, 20 April 2018 (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.