Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sam Keeley


 * 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. Hut 8.5 12:18, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Sam Keeley

 * – ( View AfD View log )

BLP of a "new" actor. Searching for independent coverage I find a lot of social media and similar hits. Two brief mentions associating his name with his character in a just released movie. Thinking this is a case of WP:TOOSOON but I wanted to get the community's consensus. Liv it ⇑ Eh?/What? 20:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:11, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Though Sam Keeley is a relatively 'New' Actor, he has not only quite a fan following, but has appeared in a large enough quantity of projects that should automatically qualify him for a wikipedia page. Information about his work is on his imdb page: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4187130/ and his agency profile : http://www.lisarichards.ie/actorsm/sam-keeley-actor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexplosion79 (talk • contribs) 07:14, 21 December 2011 (UTC)  — Rexplosion79 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –MuZemike 23:43, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. Six roles is hardly an enormous quantity of projects- I've seen people with far more to their resume get deleted because of a lack of reliable sources. A fanbase also doesn't guarantee that you'll pass WP:ARTIST either. I know of more than a few podcast authors with huge fanbases that don't pass notability guidelines. What counts here is that you can prove Keeley's notability with reliable sources, which unfortunately I'm unable to find. I do see where he's been in a movie that won an award, but that movie's notability is not transferred to Keeley (see WP:NOTINHERITED). He just doesn't pass WP:ARTIST at this time. It's too soon to add him to Wikipedia.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:28, 22 December 2011 (UTC)Tokyogirl79
 * Do Not Delete. By six roles you are obviously going by his imdb page, which is in fact incomplete. To date he is much closer to 10 projects performing in 3 more television series and a short film. I understand why you might be rallying for his deletion, but what you haven't taken into account is the quantity of projects he has performed in coupled with the amount of time he has been a working actor. It hasn't even been two years since his first film and already he has performed in a large quantity of projects. He is an actor that is, without a doubt, on the rise, and quite frankly, what is the point in deleting a page that will need to be rewritten a short time in the future when a page for him becomes even more necessary than it is now. Also, about your comments concerning fanbase...I mean no offense by this, but podcast authors are not actors. They don't have nearly the same type of popularity as actors do. Is wikipedia not an online encyclopaedia for the people? Why, when an actor has a fanbase, would you not supply that fanbase with the necessary information concerning said actor. Its baffling to me that this article is even being considered for deletion. It is not meaningless drivel, it is not purposeless, it is an information resource concerning a rising stars career to date, something which can, and WILL be useful to many fans, movie buffs and other people for a very long time. When Sam Keeley stops working, stops acting... then, and only then will I accept that this article isn't worthy of a place on this site, but for right now, deletion would not only be rash and unthinking, but completely inconsiderate to all fans out there that want this article to exist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rexplosion79 (talk • contribs) 17:22, 22 December 2011 (UTC)  — Rexplosion79 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment. I beg to differ on the fanbase for podcast authors. There are some out there that had such a large fanbase that they actually ended up becoming published authors, such as Scott Sigler. He does all of his main publishing through podcasting and his paper books all started as podcasts that did so well that a publisher picked them up. There are other podcast authors such as Phil Rossi that don't pass notability guidelines for this site, yet have enough of a fanbase that they're able to live off of the donations they get from said fanbase. It's a different type of area, but the premise is the same. Being an actor doesn't automatically give you notability and having 10 roles or 100 roles does not automatically bestow notability either, nor does time served. Also, we can't predict what will happen in Keeley's future. He might go on to become the next Orlando Bloom or he might fade away from the public eye. We can't predict the future and we can't keep an article because he might eventually pass notability guidelines one day. That goes against WP:CRYSTAL. What we need here are reliable sources that pass WP:RS. Also, WP:ITSUSEFUL isn't really an argument for keeping a page because something can be useful but still not pass notability guidelines. We could talk until the sun goes down and comes back up, but at the end of it all we'll still need those reliable sources to prove notability. Regardless of whether or not he'll one day be more famous or how useful this is, notability is shown through reliable sources. It'd be nice if we could keep every article, but there are guidelines to follow as far as notability goes.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:40, 23 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Although if you want, you could ask if you could WP:USERFY the article if it gets deleted. That will allow you to not only work on the article but also add reliable sources to it until it passes notability guidelines. Again, it's the reliable sources that will probably end up keeping this article from being kept. You need sources that are independent of Keeley and aren't business industry listings, IMDb pages, or entries that merely show he acted in something. A reliable source would be a news interview with Keeley or a media interview from someone that's considered to be notable and reliable. (For example, even the Daily Mail in all its tabloid glory could be considered a reliable source as long as it focused on Keeley.) Articles that merely quote Keeley or only mention that he acted in something don't really count as reliable sources, just trivial ones. Anything released by him or his agents doesn't count as a reliable source proving notability since it came from a primary source. I hope this helps in explaining why the article is up for deletion and why the lack of reliable sources will be what might ultimately get it removed.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:48, 23 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79

Keep - he has form and is notable already.Red Hurley (talk) 11:34, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * But we still need reliable sources to show that he's notable. He might have starred in things that have gotten media attention, but unless we have something that is focusing on him, he doesn't really pass notability guidelines. Notability is not transferred from or inherited by working on a notable film or with another notable person. We need reliable sources and they just aren't here in this article and I can't find any. If anyone can find enough reliable sources then I'd be willing to change my vote, but I just can't find any and that's really my only big thing about this AfD- the lack of reliable sources. Just be aware that as long as the article lacks reliable sources per WP:RS, this article will always be tagged for notability and it'll probably end up going to AfD again. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:20, 23 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79


 * Delete. No independent evidence of notability. Notability is not inherited from films in which he plays small roles. An assertion of a fan base does not satisfy WP:ARTIST. Lagrange613 16:05, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Lagrange613 has it right. Subject's one starring role was in a small, independent film. Otherwise, appeared on a single episode of a TV series and a couple of tiny film roles. The lack of evidence for notability is thus unsurprising. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 07:15, 31 December 2011 (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.