Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Max Cantor


 * 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 of the debate was keep. howcheng  [ t &#149; c &#149; w &#149;  e  ] 18:31, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

Max Cantor
Non-notable. Delete. Google searches [] [] return under 1000 results. worthawholebean talkcontribs 15:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC) I think it's a relevant article for an encyclopaedia. His is an interesting story. Carrowheel 15:47, 9 December 2005 (UTC) Why delete it? Good thing about Wikipedia is its huge repository of information. -carrowheel
 * Speedy delete nn-bio. Stifle 15:36, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - I see no reason to delete, this guy did exist, he was in films, and the article seems to portray him accurately. --Cyde Weys [u]  [t]  [c] 15:58, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * keep and move to correct capitalisation. Two major parts in decent-selling movies and one fairly high billing, seems to pass [{WP:BIO]] Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 16:25, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep per Guy. I have moved it myself. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( TALK )  19:23, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: By performing this move, I fixed a red link at List of famous opiate addicts that had been there for almost a year and a half. &mdash;  F REAK OF N URxTURE  ( TALK )  19:30, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Notability asserted. Hiding talk 22:31, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability indeed asserted. Aecis praatpaal 00:24, 10 December 2005 (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.