Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Waddington


 * 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   no consensus.  MBisanz  talk 01:48, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

Mark Waddington

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

Non-notable entertainer. No reliable sources to show why this person is notable. Fails WP:RS, WP:V, WP:N and WP:ENTERTAINER. PROD removed without reason. JD554 (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep He's made numerous TV appearance and won a magic competition, though I'm not sure how notable that competition is. I'd lean to the side of keep for now. Wildthing61476 (talk) 13:13, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * He claims (it's an autobiographical article) to have made TV appearances. There are no reliable sources to back up any claims in the article apart from the non-notable competition. --JD554 (talk) 13:27, 9 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.   --  treelo  radda  19:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep as I have just removed peacock, cleaned up, wikified, and sourced the article. His television appearances and award have been verified.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:35, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * As per WP:N, the reliable sources need to be "independent of the subject"—that rules http://www.uk-magic.co.uk (a directory listing written by the subject) and http://www.warble-entertainment.com (the agency he belongs to). The realitydigital.com reference doesn't show that he has appeared on TV and the remainder of the references are for an online competition of very dubious notability. There is nothing in the article that is verifiable to show that he meets any of the criteria at WP:ENTERTAINER. --JD554 (talk) 09:01, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I feel as a magician he meets that criteria of WP:PEOPLE, when the "topic of an article should be notable, or "worthy of notice"; that is, "significant, interesting, or unusual enough to deserve attention or to be recorded". Further WP:Ent is only one of the "additional criteria" of WP:PEOPLE that follow the caveat "Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; conversely, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included". Another of these additional criteria... one which precedes WP:Ent... is "Any biograhy", which allows "The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them". So, I can only address your statement "competition of very dubious notability", by pointing out that A) The contest spanned the globe, B) He won first place, and C) his win was verified in a reliable secondary source independent of the subject. I will continue to seek sources for his television performances.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 19:15, 10 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Being a magician doesn't make a person "worthy of notice", but being a notable magician would. If the competition was notable I would have expected to have seen something in a national newspaper rather than a local newspaper that covers the area the subject is from. There are still no reliable sources to verify him being a notable musician or the fact the competition is notable. --JD554 (talk) 06:01, 11 October 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.