Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Gable


 * 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. Still needs cleanup. Recent edits have helped with ref's and notability (non-admin closure) ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 12:23, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

Jeremy Gable

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

Not notable for anything beyond what is in the article page and the directly linked wiki articles all created by the same editors. Subject of article produces non-notable plays for one playhouse. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 21:53, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, referenced by LA Times and Orange County Register and USA Today. Definitely notable.

Jezhotwells (talk) 22:57, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * If there's a ref in USA Today, where is it? I don't see a reference in the article.Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 11:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * It's here, but when investigated it merely summarized copy from the OC Register. BTW when replying to comments it is best not to reply above the original poster's signature. That can lead to confusion. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Have tidied up some links and removed those to Wikipedia and twitter. Needs cleanup. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:27, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Contrary to nominator has produced work in a number of venues. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:28, 5 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh I'm sorry, he produced plays in two un-notable theaters. Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * The referenced articles show that he has been produced at five theaters so far, throughout the country, and The Blank Theater in Los Angeles, Landless Theatre Company in D.C. and Spokane Civic Theatre in Spokane, Washington are all theaters of note that have received national coverage for their produced works. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.174.158.201 (talk) 16:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. It didn't take too long to find plenty of reliable sources which also support him as an actor. I've also tweaked the article a bit. -- Banj e  b oi   09:08, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Strange, I tried your link and more than half of the search showed entries that do not even reference the playwright at all.Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 11:13, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually 13 out of 46 were notabout the playwright. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:40, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * And of the 33 left, how many are from the OC Weekly Arts Blog? Vnarfhuhwef (talk) 21:42, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking through the links on that page, none of them. A few are listing on the Theater Calendar of Orange County Register (which is online-only), but most of them are online postings of articles and reviews that were actually printed in both OC Weekly and Orange County Register, both legitimate news sources that have significant circulations.Gablewriter (talk) 22:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Meanwhile, we have 25 links coming from legitimate circulated news sources (each with different editors) such as Orange County Register, Los Angeles Times, BackStage West OC Weekly and the Spokesman-Review. As well as legitimate websites such as the Internet Movie Database, the official Flying Spaghetti Monster website and several theatrical websites.  At this point, the article is pretty well-sourced. Gablewriter (talk) 22:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * The point isn't that all those brought up in a search will make you happy, the point is that there are plenty of relaible sources. And no, blogs can be reliable sources so we look to what is being referenced to them as well as the reliability of the blog itself. In this case seemingly tied to the theater critic of a newspaper - which is more and more common as newspapers increasingly upload content to the Internet. -- Banj e  b oi   22:25, 6 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I had a look for sources when it was prodded, and didn't find quite enough to persuade me of his notability or motivate me to deprod and rescue it. But now sources are included and notability is argued, it seems fair enough to keep the article. Btw, Gablewriter wouldn't be any relation of the article subject, would they? Please read WP:COI! Fences  &amp;  Windows  01:30, 7 July 2009 (UTC)
 * COI can't be presumed - it could be a fan or imposter - the issue is ony that the content is NPOV. -- Banj e  b oi   08:42, 7 July 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.