The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR -Scottywong | communicate _ 16:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC) reply
Do not see a claim or assertion of notability backed with reliable sources to meet notability guidelines for filmmakers or general notability guidelines. CutOffTies ( talk) 17:03, 18 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I am currently in the process of updating this article with more and better references. Please be patient. I feel this unusual, prolific producer of trashy-looking, trash-talking, art-noir film is worth at least a brief mention in Wikipedia. Folklore1 ( talk) 23:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I have added two sources whose authors obviously felt Rock Savage was notable enough to mention in their work:
These sources suggest that Rock Savage may qualify under the notability criteria for Entertainers, because he has "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." Both sources also fit the Basic criteria of "secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Folklore1 ( talk) 23:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I have added a short section about Rock Savage's participation as a guest speaker at science fiction and fantasy conventions, with references for three examples that can be traced to independent online sources. Folklore1 ( talk) 01:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I added a note on the article's talk page explaining my willingness to improve the tone and provide better citations. But let's resolve the notability issue first. My preferences is to keep the article. Folklore1 ( talk) 02:49, 4 May 2012 (UTC) reply
Note, the creator/only significant editor/advocate for keeping article has admitted a conflict of interest with the subject. See talk page of article. -- CutOffTies ( talk) 16:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC) reply
This discussion about conflict of interest is wandering just a bit from the subject: notability. I still feel that Rock Savage is sufficiently notable, regardless of whether I know him. Folklore1 ( talk) 22:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC) reply
The result was no consensus. WP:NPASR -Scottywong | communicate _ 16:29, 21 May 2012 (UTC) reply
Do not see a claim or assertion of notability backed with reliable sources to meet notability guidelines for filmmakers or general notability guidelines. CutOffTies ( talk) 17:03, 18 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I am currently in the process of updating this article with more and better references. Please be patient. I feel this unusual, prolific producer of trashy-looking, trash-talking, art-noir film is worth at least a brief mention in Wikipedia. Folklore1 ( talk) 23:17, 18 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I have added two sources whose authors obviously felt Rock Savage was notable enough to mention in their work:
These sources suggest that Rock Savage may qualify under the notability criteria for Entertainers, because he has "made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment." Both sources also fit the Basic criteria of "secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Folklore1 ( talk) 23:24, 24 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I have added a short section about Rock Savage's participation as a guest speaker at science fiction and fantasy conventions, with references for three examples that can be traced to independent online sources. Folklore1 ( talk) 01:05, 29 April 2012 (UTC) reply
I added a note on the article's talk page explaining my willingness to improve the tone and provide better citations. But let's resolve the notability issue first. My preferences is to keep the article. Folklore1 ( talk) 02:49, 4 May 2012 (UTC) reply
Note, the creator/only significant editor/advocate for keeping article has admitted a conflict of interest with the subject. See talk page of article. -- CutOffTies ( talk) 16:47, 4 May 2012 (UTC) reply
This discussion about conflict of interest is wandering just a bit from the subject: notability. I still feel that Rock Savage is sufficiently notable, regardless of whether I know him. Folklore1 ( talk) 22:26, 15 May 2012 (UTC) reply