Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Chon


 * 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. Sr13 01:53, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Justin Chon
Justin Chon – (View AfD) (View log) Vanity page. This actor's work is insubstantial and does not warrant an article. 601 hits in google search. Actor has no public following. Prod tag was removed by someone with a bare IP. Quatloo 09:51, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep That IMDB page proves some notability. Adding stub tag.  Corpx 16:31, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
 * I argue that it does exactly the opposite. Quatloo 21:53, 6 May 2007 (UTC)


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,


 * Delete. I'm not sure how this qualifies under WP:BIO. First, the coverage is not "substantial" nor are there multiple sources. Second, and this is a judgment call, I don't think he has been in a significant role. Third there is no large fan base and, third, there is no unique contribution to the entertainment world.  Jody B   talk 00:24, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Certainly not a vanity page, and is notable.  Cool Blue  talk to me 01:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * How is it not a vanity page? The guy is a total nobody. Quatloo 04:16, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Expand - Article needs to be expanded to better illustrate the subjects notability and importance. If that can not be established, then the article should be deleted. ---Ozgod 01:33, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep/Expand - Very close to the wrong edge of WP:N but if expanded it could be okay. If there is not much further information to be had then Delete. -- tennis man   sign here!  01:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 02:03, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete and let it be recreated when this gentlemen satisfies WP:BIO with a significant role in a notable production. the_undertow talk  02:34, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete noting that imdb and the like do not constitute non-trivial coverage. They are simply the sign that this guy has an agent. I currently see no hope of using reliable sources to move this article beyond a stub. No problem with recreating in the future if that state of affairs changes. Pascal.Tesson 04:22, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, secondary roles & no sources. --Dhartung | Talk 05:01, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, and expand. Not a vanity, its quite difficult for this article to pass notability guidelines since the article is vague. Terence 06:04, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It can't be expanded because nothing has ever been published on this guy. Quatloo 06:06, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, obviously. Fails WP:BIO miserably. Having a profile on IMDB is not a claim to notability (it is internet users that supply information to that website). There are no multiple, secondary, independent and reliable sources available on the subject. --Zamkudi 09:46, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Zamkudi.Montco 15:11, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete He's just an extra. Fails WP:BIO because there isn't anything to source it.  Eliminator JR  Talk  17:19, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete He is not notable, even though he is more than just an extra. The Peter Wu role was substantial, but one good TV movie role is not enough for notability. I found no published articles about him. --Bejnar 02:26, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Infrangible 18:15, 13 May 2007 (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.