Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marc Davenport


 * 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. &mdash; Scientizzle 15:45, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Marc Davenport

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

An unreferenced under-referenced article about an actor and former U.S. soldier know for his work with a small theater group in Sierra Vista, Arizona. Other claims to fame are described in the article as "rumours". Contested prod. ×Meegs 04:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. At worst, a hoax. At best, falls far short of notability standard of WP:BIO. -- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 05:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Assuming this is real -- largely here to tell a hero-worshippy brush with greatness tale. No indication of notability whatsoever. --Dhartung | Talk 05:53, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete: This person appears to be (assuming the article's information is accurate--I was unable to verify it) an obscure local actor. TheScotch (talk) 06:22, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per all above. A biographical article can't be based on rumors. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:35, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:18, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Claims. Rumors. Only source is self-published. Um... no. DarkAudit (talk) 17:49, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Retain. This article, though about a semi-obscure actor/singer/soldier, is cited in a published interview about him conducted by someone named "Steve Stottlemyre".  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.27.1.3 (talk) 15:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment:
 * 1. An editor's votes should have more force, I should think, when he actually signs in.
 * 2. Since no Wikipedia article can be a valid source for another Wikipedia article, it follows that the "publishing" of a Wikipedia article cannot be a valid reason for retaining it. TheScotch (talk) 22:10, 1 April 2008 (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.