Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Brock


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  NNADI GOOD LUCK  ( Talk &#124; Contribs ) 22:18, 6 January 2020 (UTC)

Richard Brock

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:BIO or WP:GNG Boleyn (talk) 20:40, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 20:42, 15 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 21:32, 15 December 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * PROD declined: not eligible for soft deletion czar  22:06, 22 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ミラP 02:47, 23 December 2019 (UTC) \ Delete. The article is on the verge of being a stub, isn't entirely neutral, and as a quick Google search will note, Brock isn't particularly noteworthy. Dictator Black (talk) 03:00, 23 December 2019 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment: This article was in a strange state, as additions by WP:SPA had turned it into a how-to article promoting a "Brock Initiative" wrapped inside a pre-existing biography. The main body of these additions was a WP:COPYVIO which I have removed. A substantial part of what remains can probably also be considered a WP:COPYVIO: see the Mission section of . AllyD (talk) 08:55, 23 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep As executive producer and producer on Life on Earth, The Living Planet, Wildlife on One, Natural World, and others, he certainly meets WP:CREATIVE "The person has created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work or collective body of work. In addition, such work must have been the primary subject of ... of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." There are reviews of these series, and episodes within them, describing them as "Richard Brock's film", "Richard Brock's documentary", etc. The article certainly needs work, as it represent the body of work for which he is notable in just one sentence - the second and third paras could be deleted, and his work expanded, with sources from The Sunday Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian, The Stage, etc. RebeccaGreen (talk) 11:05, 23 December 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 14:13, 30 December 2019 (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.