Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neal Jones


 * 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   keep. Listed for 20 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:32, 14 August 2010 (UTC)

Neal Jones

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Delete - no independent reliable sources attest to the notability of this actor. Fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO. PROD removed with no explanation. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 13:02, 25 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Not a star, certainly, but a longstanding actor with a respectable body of work. I have added referenced information that suggests that he is worthy of note. (And I apologize for not explaining why I contested the prod and for not mentioning my intention to improve the article. I only discovered that it was on the verge of deletion just after midnight my time, and making the article presentable-looking was all I had the time and energy for.)-- Shelf Skewed  Talk  17:16, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
 * No worries. The article does look a lot better but IMHO the guy still fails GNG and BIO. IMDB and IBDB aren't reliable sources and the linked reviews spend about 2 1/2 paragraphs on Jones. The award nomination really isn't enough either, although the film festival is probably sufficiently notable for an article. Are You The Cow Of Pain? (talk) 17:29, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:01, 1 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 26 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep and continue improvements. Rarely does a review of a play in its disection of plot and theme and staging spend more than a sentence or two on any particular player, so the occasional 2-1/2 paragraphs addressing an individual and praising his work in contextual relationship to the production itself specifically meets WP:GNG in being more than a trivial mention, even if not the main topic of the source material. And one might note, that while IMDB and IBDB are unsuitable for sourcing notability, they are usually okay for simple verifications of released works, just as are the works themselves. So I have no doubt that the individual's career meets the instructions at WP:ENT in his having "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions".  All that is needed is some work and improvement through regular editing.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:53, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW ( Talk ) 18:23, 8 August 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
 * 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.