Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wellyn Totman


 * 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. Clear consensus for article retention. North America1000 11:47, 1 June 2018 (UTC)

Wellyn Totman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails GNG. The name "Wellyn Totman" does not appear in a search of Google News. A search of Google Books only finds credit lines (e.g. "Screenplay: Wellyn Totman") that provide no biographical information. A search of JSTOR returns no results. The article is currently sourced to one website: a local, Duluth, Minnesota publishing portal. Chetsford (talk) 07:33, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Neutral An article based on trivialities because there's nothing more substantial out there. Why should Wikipedia's readers care that someone who once wrote some screenplays was once arrested for drink driving? Exemplo347 (talk) 08:18, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Exemplo347 (talk) 08:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Minnesota-related deletion discussions. Exemplo347 (talk) 08:26, 25 May 2018 (UTC)

*Delete per fail GNG and marginal WP:BLP1E--Quek157 (talk) 09:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep notable for his notable work. Much of it has been reviewed. Coverage such as here establishes notability beyond any doubt. FloridaArmy (talk) 12:22, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * As a side note, Google News only has very recent articles. So searching a subject's name and newspapers.com is more useful since Google News did away with its archives. FloridaArmy (talk) 13:45, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Per FloridaArmy. It is useless to discuss Google News for a subject not recently deceased. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 16:05, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes (just) WP:ANYBIO: persistent (if occasional) coverage, in this case years after his death. —SerialNumber54129  paranoia / cheap sh*t room 16:27, 25 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep - Easily passes WP:FILMMAKER. Screenwriter with a 10 year career, and numerous notable credits.  Onel 5969  TT me 14:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep (as above) Wpgbrown (talk) 18:37, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep  as per above, still a marginal case of WP:BIO1E and another weakly sourced article, we need more RS to be into the article should it be a keep. --Quek157 (talk) 18:42, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I doubt it will ever be anything much and I'm not keen on Wikipedia's increasing tendency to become another version of IMDb but, nonetheless, it meets the guidelines. It is the guidelines where the fault lies. - Sitush (talk) 19:46, 27 May 2018 (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.