Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hudson (British 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   soft delete. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

John Hudson (British actor)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I've had a request from the subject of the article and am nominating on his behalf. I've not done much research (yet), but from a quick Google it's barely notable. It has been PROD'd once before and the tag was removed after 6.5 days, and one measly reference added. At the moment it's a long list of unreferenced performances.  Alex Muller  10:11, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 16:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete An article that falls under WP:BLP? And doesn't look like many references... I can't seem to locate any on google either.... JguyTalkDone 23:06, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment&mdash;This article may be conflated with John Joseph (actor). I say this because they have different birth years yet they list common TV roles. Regards, RJH (talk) 17:47, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for noticing that RJH - this does look weird. I asked John Hudson and got this reply:
 * > This is not me, although Equity confused us a couple of years ago. While a child actor and not a member of Equity, he was known as John Hudson (his real name), now an adult actor he has changed his name. There is also an opera singer named John Hudson who is also not a member of Equity.
 * I've tried to make that more clear with this edit  Alex Muller  13:19, 17 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cúchullain t/ c 19:25, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - TP 02:14, 28 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: Considering circumstances and weak case for notability, I don't oppose deletion of current rather poor article.--Milowent • talkblp-r  03:38, 29 September 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.