Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lew Baldwin


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ✗ plicit  00:55, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Lew Baldwin

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails GNG and is insufficiently supported by reliable sources Paul W (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Artists-related deletion discussions. Paul W (talk) 19:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Paul, I've added missing citations to the article. Is there anything else needed to keep the article from deletion? HermanDF (talk) 14:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. Sorry User:HermanDF, but the added citations are only fleeting or passing mentions, not significant coverage in reliable, independent, secondary sources. Paul W (talk) 20:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok, which parts need to be removed to keep the article from deletion? or which parts qualify as independant/scondary?
 * In other words, how do we keep this article on wikipedia? HermanDF (talk) 15:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hi, User:HermanDF. Any significant assertion which cannot be substantiated by at least one reliable source could/should be removed. Reference 1 appears to be a self-penned press release; refs 2, 3, 5-7 and 9 are routine/passing mentions; refs 4 and 10 are from IMDb - which "is user-generated, and the site is considered unreliable by a majority of editors" (see WP:IMDB); which leaves ref 8 (seemingly brief mentions in a book, which I cannot verify). The subject therefore fails WP:GNG - it is not suitable for a stand-alone article in Wikipedia as Baldwin has not "received in  that are ". Sorry, but, in short, I don't think this can be kept on Wikipedia. Paul W (talk) 15:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your help in clarifying Paul. I've removed the majority of the sources and added a reliable source that is independent of the subject. HermanDF (talk) 17:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hi, User:HermanDF. The key GNG requirement remains significant coverage. Paul W (talk) 17:44, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Would any of the references I removed be significant enough? Or what is required to qualify as significant? HermanDF (talk) 20:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment. Hi, User:HermanDF. Thanks for asking. I should have explained. WP:SIGCOV: "Significant coverage addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material." Basically, 'significant' is an assessment of the depth or extent of coverage; it will give detail that extends beyond routine or passing mentions. As previously discussed, several of the sources previously used for the article were passing mentions. Paul W (talk) 10:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi Captain Raju, I've added missing citations to the article. Is there anything else needed to keep the article from deletion? HermanDF (talk) 14:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:37, 3 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi Paul, I've added missing citations to the article. HermanDF (talk) 14:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Is there anything else needed to keep the article from deletion? HermanDF (talk) 14:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  00:06, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm not seeing the depth of coverage needed to show that WP:GNG is met or to justify a WP:BLP. -- Kinu t/c 19:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Delete: Agreed with nomination, person fails to meet WP:GNG due to a lack of significant coverage. 1keyhole (talk) 03:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: No coverage for this person that I can find. Being quoted in a book isn't the stuff of notability here and as explained in the comment above, most are trivial mentions. Oaktree b (talk) 02:02, 12 February 2024 (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.