Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerod Howard


 * 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. -- Scott (talk) 01:51, 4 January 2019 (UTC)

Jerod Howard

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A non-notable actor who has appeared in minor roles in several films and episodic television. His most major role was in a borderline notable film, October Moon, where this has been redirected for a while. An IP insists on creating an article for this actor. Only other major credit was on the direct to DVD sequel to October Moon. The IP has incorrectly stated that Howard is set to appear in the upcoming version of Into the Devil's Reach, however that is a short film, in which the actor had a minor role, and was released in 2017. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR.  Onel 5969  TT me 19:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  Onel 5969  TT me 19:26, 27 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The grounds for deletion mentioned above are base opinion. His role was in the film, October Moon, where this has been redirected for a while, was valid and as notable as other actors credited who also have wikipedia articles themselves. An IP insists on creating an article for this actor for that fact and editors keep ignoring the references or choose to only acknowledge part of the reference as suits grounds for immediate deletion instead of editing and or suggesting corrections.  Only other major credit was on the direct to DVD sequel to October Moon - incorrect as there are other notable credits listed on IMDb.com and online to be contributed. The IP has incorrectly stated that Howard is set to appear in the upcoming version of Into the Devil's Reach, however that is a short film, in which the actor had a minor role, and was released in 2017- correct and incorrect as the film is being extended into a full feature pending release in 2019 and will be updated. The IP has suggested this article is a stub and should have reasonable time to be contributed to instead of being deleted and redirected completely simply because of editor opinion. The "major" "minor" comments by editor seem to be a personal opinion and not principle and there are no misquotes, false information or invalid links or other issues with the stub article. The IP is not claiming to be an editor but has a valid right to contribute and open the door to discussion instead of deletion — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.145.171.28 (talk)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 00:58, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia isn't a warmed-over version of IMDB. --Calton | Talk 03:56, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete : No indication of Wikipedia notability per WP:NACTOR, WP:BIO or even WP:GNG. Moreover, trying to argue that the article should be kept because subject is likely to be notable in the future is not really a good argument to make for the reasons given in WP:TOOSOON. Neither is trying to argue WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS since it's quite possible that those articles about those other actors should not exist as well. If the actor's career takes off in 2019 and he starts to receive significant coverage in reliable sources (IMDb is generally not considered to be a reliable source per WP:RS/IMDB and WP:UGC.), then perhaps the article can be re-created. Personally, I think restoring the redirect back to October Moon is probably OK per WP:CHEAP, but there appears to have been some edit warring by IP 24.145.171.28 over the redirect as well as a removal of the AfD template from the article by the same IP which might mean deletion is the surest way to stop any further disruption. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:13, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete none of the sources fit the Wikipedia definition of indepdent, reliable 3rd party sources. IMDb is not reliable, his website is clearly not indepdent, and an interview is not considered to add towards this measure of notability. The film he was in was at best borderline notable, and he clearly falls short of the multiple, significant roles in notable productions which is the main metric for judging actor notability. He is not even close to any other metric of actor notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:50, 28 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: Undoubtedly fails the WP:GNG and WP:NACTOR. WP:TOOSOON applies in this case. -- LACaliNYC ✉ 20:19, 30 December 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete fails WP:N and WP:GNG.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:49, 2 January 2019 (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.