Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Merz (2nd nomination)


 * 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

Jesse Merz
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Procedural nomination, to help out a newbie. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:36, 25 February 2015 (UTC) From : Self-promotional article created by the subject of the article. References often appear to be objective third party references, but upon close examination most are from the subject himself. #2, #4, #6, # #11, #12, #14, #15, #18, #19 and most of #20-#31 are internal college blogs. #11 & #12 are dead links. #8 is an expired website created by the subject. #9 & #10 refer to the same project which was canceled four years ago. #32 is an IMDb page that must have been created a decade ago; he lists intern positions in which he promoted movie trailers for an advertising company and lists them as if he worked on the films. He also interned at the Sundance Film Festival but lists it on IMDb as if it were a legit credit working on a major motion picture. If you remove all of these self-promotional links, there is virtually nothing left.

In addition, many of the subject's acting credits are misrepresented. His work at the Atlantic Theater Company was as a student. The majority of the film acting credits are for student film projects or as an extra. Based on this logic, every film or acting student in the world should have a Wikipedia page.

This article has already been deemed of "low importance." I would go a step further; most of the credits are misrepresented. It has been nominated for deletion twice before. Both times there was no consensus but deletion was heavily favored. And both times the reason deletion was avoided was mostly because reviewers didn't read the details of the subject's references. The links are overwhelmingly self-promotional. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefariconga (talk • contribs)

See also in Talk:Jesse Merz by Stefariconga. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, per nom, and my nomination and comments at the original AfD. Fails WP:BIO and more specifically WP:ARTIST, WP:PROF, and WP:NACTOR. Valfontis (talk) 19:20, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Valfontis (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Valfontis (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Valfontis (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Valfontis (talk) 17:39, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete The subject is clearly a college or high school acting instructor. So are tens of thousands of other people. He isn't noteworthy. I have also done additional research since my previous concerns. Most of his theater credits are for the Columbia Gorge Rep. Theater; a children's summer camp he co-owns with his mother. This strikes me as blatant self-promotion and is misleading at best. This means the majority of his credits include student films he shot while a student at NYU, children's theater productions performed at his family farm and college theater he directed as a college instructor. None of that is noteworthy. Even worse, he misrepresents internships on his IMDb page and then reposts that information here. Its difficult to determine if anything on his self-promotional page is real, let alone note-worthy.Stefariconga (talk) 19:31, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 00:15, 4 March 2015 (UTC) Delete. No legitimate claim of notability. Many claims are fraudulent or inflated. Even legit-looking links often lead to self-promotional sources in disguise. Stefariconga (talk) 05:10, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. No legitimate claim of notability, i.e. this is not an encyclopedic subject. Agricola44 (talk) 16:40, 6 March 2015 (UTC).
 * , you don't have to !vote again after a relisting. All the !votes above the relisting template will be taken into account by the closing admin. Also, since this is not a vote, but a discussion based on consensus, that's why I say "!vote". Just let the process run its course, I think it's pretty clear you want the article deleted. :) Valfontis (talk) 14:10, 9 March 2015 (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.