Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sideshow Cinema (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  Majorly  (o rly?) 16:17, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Sideshow Cinema

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Appears to be a list of mostly non notable actors. Seeing as this went up for deletion a year ago (no consensus) and hasn't improved much I figured I would nominate it again. --Daniel J. Leivick 06:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. Without the long list of actors we have a reasonable article. --Daniel J. Leivick 21:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Since this is compromise is not acceptable to some editors. I guess I will have to withdraw my withdrawal. --Daniel J. Leivick 00:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: The Sideshow Cinema entry contains a list of Michael Legge's stable of actors. This list includes award winning actors and actors who have appeared in award winning films. They are notable in the independent movie making world of which I am a fan. The article gives a good thumbnail bio on the actors. I will point out this entry Allegan Community Players which gives no background information on any of the actors and is just a list of names of actors who played in community theater. This article is much better. Plank 13:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * If individual actors are notable then by all mean they should have their own articles.  If Sideshow Cinema is notable then it should have a real article that demonstrates it's notability.  The Allegan Community players article should probably be deleted to and in any case the presence of worse articles is not a reason to keep. --Daniel J. Leivick 14:53, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep but the article needs to be expanded to be more than just a list of actors. This is a notable group, and a number of the individuals listed (such as Debbie Rochon) are notable enough to warrant their own articles, which would serve to shorten the actor list section a bit. 23skidoo 15:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The problem is this article has been sitting for a year without anyone adding any source. Instead of just saying it is notable some one should put up some references and I can withdraw the nomination. --Daniel J. Leivick 15:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete; the article isn't even about Sideshow Cinema, rather it's an article showcasing amateur (unpaid) actors who don't qualify for articles on the own. Many have been deleted only to be recreated here. This is much like having an article on a random Restaurant in the form of mini-bios on the entire staff. In addition, the assertion that anything having to do with this is "award-winning" is a bit misleading. We're talking B-movie awards of very limited notability here, not the Oscars. If any of the "actors" listed do warrant articles of their own that's a different issue. Most do not. -R. fiend 18:13, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is not a suitable subject for an encyclopedia. Mr. Berry
 * Comment The problem is not that this article is not sourced but that the sources have little reference to the actual subject of the article. The sources are generally about the actors in the list. --Daniel J. Leivick 15:34, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep with suggestion . Keep the article, but delete everything except the introduction and the sources.  Note some of the most prominent members of the "stable of actors" in one sentence.  In fact, I will do so right now; please revert me if my change goes too far. -- Black Falcon 20:47, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I have performed the edit. The sourced information of the previous version is still present in the edit history and, if this AFD closes as 'no consensus' or 'keep', I intend to merge some of it into relevant biographical articles.  -- Black Falcon 21:00, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, my recommendation to keep stands regardless of whether the actor-specific information is retained or removed. If that information is to be kept (to which I'm not necessarily opposed), I think the main issue is to improve the manner in which it is presented.  -- Black Falcon 00:30, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete whether or not an encyclopaedic article on this subject can be written is a matter for debate, but this is not it, and this contains little if anything that would contribute towards that. It seems at present to be largely comprised of actor bios for people who completely fail WP:BIO, and in some cases at least is being used as an end-run around deletion policy by including content which has been deleted when added as separate articles. Guy (Help!) 10:03, 28 March 2007 (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.