Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tuck Tucker


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 20:14, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Tuck Tucker

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:CREATIVE. His occupation(s) just doesn't attract much media attention. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:14, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Virginia-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:38, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Comics and animation-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:39, 2 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:40, 2 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete struck and changed to Keep At first I thought an article in Animation magazine might be worth something, but it turns out it is merely an article the subject wrote. Other references are just scholastic press stuff, not reliable sources, or at least nothing significant. Simply having a career--and having a few articles written about it for the community where one teaches--does not equal encyclopedic notability. This wikipage reads like a fleshed out version of a linked-in profile. UPDATE: E.M.Gregory (talk) and MarkH21 (talk) comments below are spot on and made me rethink my initial delate. Directing a major motion picture release is a qualifier, plus new edits and references--although fairly run-of-the-mill coverage and not really about the subject--are probably enough per WP:CREATIVE. ShelbyMarion (talk) 16:08, 3 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep He directed Hey Arnold!, I added the first reviews that came up in a search, then stopped because there were too many. Every news outlet in the country seems to have reviewed it.  This may carry him past WP:CREATIVE.  I'm gonna wait and see what other editors find.E.M.Gregory (talk) 01:53, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Soft Keep: I was leaning towards delete when reviewing the article and searching for other sources, but him being director of Hey Arnold! and its feature film (with not so great reviews) may bring him past #3 of WP:CREATIVE. This is barely mentioned in the article but is worth something. — MarkH21 (talk) 18:38, 4 March 2019 (UTC)
 * MapleTreeXZ: I included more citations for his work with the help of some reliable sources, will this help keep the article about Tuck Tucker up? (from Article author)
 * Yes it will. Britishfinance (talk) 18:07, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep per WP:HEY ahs the article has been significantly improved including the addition of more reliable sources coverage, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:07, 7 March 2019 (UTC)
 * MapleTreeXZ: Does this mean I can delete the "Article deletion" notice? (from Article author).
 * No, wait for the AfD to finish formally and the "Article delection" notice will be removed as part of that. Britishfinance (talk) 18:07, 9 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep - In the page's currently state, it passes GNG. And I think there are definitely available sources out there that can used for this article to make it even stronger. Horizonlove (talk) 09:41, 8 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Borderline but Hey Arnold!: The Movie is notable enought to have its own WP article; plus other references closeer to WP:GNG. Britishfinance (talk) 18:07, 9 March 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.