The result was delete. This is one of those cases where the keep argument makes the delete argument about poor sources explicit Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
WP:BLP of an actor, not properly sourced as clearing WP:NACTOR. As always, the notability test for an actor is not simply the ability to list roles that he played -- having roles is the job description, so every actor who exists would always get a guaranteed Wikipedia inclusion freebie if all you had to do was list the roles. Rather, the notability test requires some evidence that he received some reliable source coverage in media about his having of roles -- but the only sources present here at all are his IMDb profile and a NetDetective search being used to dox his private personal life post-retirement, neither of which are reliable or notability-supporting sources at all. And no, an actor isn't automatically notable just because you make an unsourced claim about one of his roles representing a historic first, either — lots of people in history have been claimed as historic firsts when they actually weren't, just because the source making the claim didn't research hard enough to be aware of the predecessor(s), so there still has to be proper reliable source verification that their "historic first" status is actually true. Bearcat ( talk) 18:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
The result was delete. This is one of those cases where the keep argument makes the delete argument about poor sources explicit Spartaz Humbug! 06:58, 13 April 2019 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
WP:BLP of an actor, not properly sourced as clearing WP:NACTOR. As always, the notability test for an actor is not simply the ability to list roles that he played -- having roles is the job description, so every actor who exists would always get a guaranteed Wikipedia inclusion freebie if all you had to do was list the roles. Rather, the notability test requires some evidence that he received some reliable source coverage in media about his having of roles -- but the only sources present here at all are his IMDb profile and a NetDetective search being used to dox his private personal life post-retirement, neither of which are reliable or notability-supporting sources at all. And no, an actor isn't automatically notable just because you make an unsourced claim about one of his roles representing a historic first, either — lots of people in history have been claimed as historic firsts when they actually weren't, just because the source making the claim didn't research hard enough to be aware of the predecessor(s), so there still has to be proper reliable source verification that their "historic first" status is actually true. Bearcat ( talk) 18:38, 4 April 2019 (UTC)