Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nate Ruegger


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 02:24, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Nate Ruegger

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

No indication of nobility, no decent sources found in WP:BEFORE. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 02:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete no indication of notability, subject appears to be editing their own article. Wgullyn  ( talk ) 02:05, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect this was a child voice actor -- and was in the field because his father Tom Ruegger worked on the shows he performed on. (It's not obvious that article meets notability guidelines either, but that is for a different discussion.)  Everything else in the revision history looks to be COATRACK-style promotionalism. User:力 (powera,  π,  ν ) 03:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Oaktree b (talk) 03:44, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:14, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 06:15, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * This article has existed in largely the same form since 2010 until only today being updated to accurately reflect new developments. Why deletion now and not in the past 10+ years? Multiple news sources have now been cited to reflect these recent developments. What can be done to salvage this 10+ year-old article while accurately updating recent developments? User:NateRuegger (talk) 07:40, 26 January 2022 (PST) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nate Ruegger (talk • contribs) —  has only contributed to the article(s) under discussion for deletion and this XFD page. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:59, 28 January 2022 (UTC)
 * The sources are either non-WP:RS blogs, or non-independent sources. Neither work to establish notability. Just because an article has existed for a long time does not mean it is notable, it just means no one has noticed it. Wikipedia is not a good location for autobiographies. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:19, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Not seeing strong enough sources to support WP:BIO notability. OhNo itsJamie Talk 13:55, 27 January 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete definitely not a GNG pass and doesn't seem to pass WP:NACTOR or WP:FILMMAKER either. Best, GPL93 (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2022 (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.