Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Ford (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   keep. The argument for deletion for the reason that he doesn't have notable or recognizable roles was well-refuted by the collection of sources shown, some of which should probably be added to the article. — GorillaWarfare talk 04:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Jim Ford (actor)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable, bit part actor. Stephen 23:07, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree that he is not notable enough for an article; doesn't seem to have had any really notable or recognizable roles Swimnteach (talk) 23:50, 12 January 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 13 January 2011 (UTC)




 * Keep Per WP:GNG. He's a working actor and stuntman who gets lots of small roles, and while "iffy" at best in meeting WP:ENT, he achieves guideline notability for his overall career receiving coverage in multiple reliable sources over an extended period... something that non-notables just don't have happen... Telegram and Gazette (1) Telegram and Gazette (2) Telegram and Gazette (3) Banner (1) Baner (2) Backstage (1) Backstage (2) Screen Crave San Diego Union-Tribune and others.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 06:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Probably meets WP:ENT with his many roles, and WP:BIO with the coverage in various sources. P. D. Cook  Talk to me! 21:11, 13 January 2011 (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.