Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Bonchune


 * 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 Delete. Deathphoenix ʕ 15:50, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

Robert Bonchune
Vanity - People are being extremely vain today !!! David Humphreys 18:46, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete -- no assertion of notability. Powers 18:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and Cleanup - He has an impressive list of credits on IMDB. The effects artist of Star Trek, Babylon 5, Apollo 13, Enterprise and others. Not quite as well-known a name as Ken Perlin, but well known in digital effects.
 * They'd be more impressive if he was actually credited in those shows. =)  Powers 19:05, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Sometimes people prefer to be in the background. ;-) Either way, the article can't stay the way it is. It needs attention, or a deletion. אמר Steve Caruso ( desk / poll ) 19:08, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * The effects artist? No, I don't think so. And as for Sometimes people prefer to be in the background, 1) WP:V: not just a good idea, it's the law. 2) How did he manage to hide when the credits were being compiled? --Calton | Talk 02:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)


 * I say keep it. --Jonathan Watson 20:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)Jonathan Watson
 * Delete, non-notable. I checked some of his credits on IMDB, and it's odd how he's not listed for either Babylon 5, or Deep Space 9, two major shows. I even saw a Foley artist listed as "uncredited".  Tychocat 22:23, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity bio: IMDB shows a smaller list than claimed, and they show him to be basically a glorified technician. That few credits do NOT qualify as "impressive". --Calton | Talk 02:17, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Go to www.Eden FX.com . It has Rob's name listed. Eden Fx is listed to animating Surface, since he didn't play a big role in the process.--Jonathan Watson 02:42, 30 June 2006 (UTC)Jonathan Watson
 * Delete not a notable person and a very poorly written article. If kept it needs serious cleanup. Gwernol 04:09, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete; one of many (non-notable) minor technical contributors on a small number of works. --MCB 04:32, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
 * KEEP It is good, just needs some help on it. --Jimmy McCutcheon 01:42, 1 July 2006 (UTC)Jimmy McCutcheon User's 4th edit -- and the first outside of creating his useer page
 * Delete. Five alarm sockpuppet alert.  RFerreira 03:26, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I have now edited it. It is better thatn before. Please take a look. --Jonathan Watson 14:20, 7 July 2006 (UTC)Jonathan Watson


 * 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.