The result was keep. Article has been improved with reliable sources since nomination. ( non-admin closure) Goodvac ( talk) 00:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I'm finding name drops and directory listings, but nothing substantial. Just one sentence mentions here and there. This has been tagged for non-IMDb sources for 3 years with none forthcoming. Everything out there on him is just name-dropping, absolutely no substance to the sources. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep: Passes WP:NACTOR. Being tagged for non-IMDb sources for 3 years (or 5, or 15) is not a reason to nominate a subject for deletion, it is a reason to improve the article.-- Cavarrone ( talk) 11:11, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply
*Delete: fails
WP:GNG with no references to demonstrate notability. In addition, no Google news hits are present for the periods of 2006-2011
[1] and 2002-2005.
[2]
Till I Go Home (
talk) 07:54, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
reply
The result was keep. Article has been improved with reliable sources since nomination. ( non-admin closure) Goodvac ( talk) 00:12, 15 December 2011 (UTC) reply
I'm finding name drops and directory listings, but nothing substantial. Just one sentence mentions here and there. This has been tagged for non-IMDb sources for 3 years with none forthcoming. Everything out there on him is just name-dropping, absolutely no substance to the sources. Ten Pound Hammer • ( What did I screw up now?) 01:41, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply
Keep: Passes WP:NACTOR. Being tagged for non-IMDb sources for 3 years (or 5, or 15) is not a reason to nominate a subject for deletion, it is a reason to improve the article.-- Cavarrone ( talk) 11:11, 29 November 2011 (UTC) reply
*Delete: fails
WP:GNG with no references to demonstrate notability. In addition, no Google news hits are present for the periods of 2006-2011
[1] and 2002-2005.
[2]
Till I Go Home (
talk) 07:54, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
reply