Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jon Macht


 * 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. Keeper |  76  17:30, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

Jon Macht

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I can't find the requisite independent third party RS coverage of this person. Just doesn't appear to rise to requisite level to meet our notability standards. Does have a good number of uncredited IMDB entries, but I don't think that quite cuts it. Open to hearing otherwise, if that is the case or others find more convincing RS coverage. Created by an SPA. Tagged for notability since 2009, the day it was created. Epeefleche (talk) 06:38, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Maryland-related deletion discussions. &#9733;&#9734;  DUCK IS PEANUTBUTTER &#9734;&#9733; 06:42, 6 February 2013 (UTC)


 *  Delete Low level film industry worker with only passing mentions in reliable sources.  Cullen 328  Let's discuss it  17:23, 6 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:37, 13 February 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Comment: I find it strange that while only briefly hinted in the article's text, there is no decent expansion in the article about the man's work as a journalist. His film work as an effects editor or second unit camera fails WP:FILMMAKER for his involvememnt in films, but as a journalist, he may have written enough to maybe just push at passing WP:AUTHOR. Time to dig. And more than just a Passing mention, the man HAS been written of in significant detail which shares that he began as a journalist... in such as Herald Mail and picked up by such as Daily Press  Burbank Leader  Baltimore Sun  Hartford Courant  However, this seems to be just one decent bit of coverage picked up widely.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 04:20, 18 February 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 01:23, 20 February 2013 (UTC)

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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:09, 27 February 2013 (UTC)


 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2013 March 7.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  06:46, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - There is one piece counting towards GNG in the footnotes, the other is probably self-supplied. Career accomplishment does not seem sufficient in and of itself for this to get the benefit of the doubt in a close call on GNG, so a couple more independently published sources dealing substantially with the subject would seem to be necessary here. Every person has a story, yes, but not every personal story is encyclopedia-worthy. If a couple more things pop up, then a GNG pass is called for, otherwise, a deletion... Carrite (talk) 17:15, 7 March 2013 (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.