- 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 no consensus defaulting to Keep and without prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem ( talk) 05:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Stephen A. Hope ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No claim of notability. Doesn't meet WP:NMUSIC or any other SNG. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 03:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Baby miss fortune 04:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. ~dom Kaos~ ( talk) 13:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Somewhat notable, an emmy nominee and son of an oscar winner. Subuey ( talk) 21:03, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- @
Subuey: being a relative of a notable person wouldn't be sufficient, per
WP:NOTINHERITED. With regard to the Oscar nominations, could you elaborate? There's nothing about this in the article, and it might help us decide whether this is sufficient to demonstrate notability.
~dom Kaos~ (
talk)
08:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- You can look it up, just look up "emmy", not "oscar", I made a mistake.
Subuey (
talk)
19:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, he's been nominated twice for Emmies: both nominations were for Outstanding Sound Editing for a Miniseries or a Special. Both nominations were for a group of twelve, rather than as a single artiste, so I'm still not convinced this is enough to pass GNG. ~dom Kaos~ ( talk) 21:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- You can look it up, just look up "emmy", not "oscar", I made a mistake.
Subuey (
talk)
19:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- @
Subuey: being a relative of a notable person wouldn't be sufficient, per
WP:NOTINHERITED. With regard to the Oscar nominations, could you elaborate? There's nothing about this in the article, and it might help us decide whether this is sufficient to demonstrate notability.
~dom Kaos~ (
talk)
08:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Seems to be a run-of-th-mill industry journeyman. His credits on IMDB are extensive, but as nominator points out nothing turns up when trying to locate independent, third party coverage that would indicate stand out notability. His Emmy nominations were as part of a team of a dozen people working in the Sound Department in various capacities. I agree with the above comment that that is not enough stand alone recognition. Had he actually won, perhaps it could be a stronger argument, but I still think it comes up short. ShelbyMarion ( talk) 21:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I have to say I am concerned about the tendency to want articles on subjects who are notable in their own field, for example the Fandango biography, to be deleted. Subuey ( talk) 22:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as per nomination. Whatever his father did is irrelevant. -- Rusf10 ( talk) 19:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Weak delete. This falls under WP:CREATIVE, and I cannot see which inclusion criterion would be met, although he has numerous film credits spanning his career, according to IMDB. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 19:31, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep The article could benefit from editing and some more content. He was clearly notable enough in his profession to warrant an obituary in Variety. 22:42, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- I'm bothered by the notion that just because someone gets an obituary in a notable publication, they are suddenly notable even though they didn't merit an article here while alive. It's almost like a WP:1EVENT, becoming notable simply due to passing. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 22:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- An obituary does not establish notability (regardless of the publication in which it appeared). Even the most unotable people still get obituaries.-- Rusf10 ( talk) 22:50, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep and expand the references meet the standard set at GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk • contribs) 00:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete -- does not meet WP:ANYBIO and significant RS coverage not found. Being a "member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the Motion Picture Editors Guild and the American Federation of Musicians" is an insufficient claim of significance, and there's nothing better. Reads like a memorial page. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:38, 20 December 2017 (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.
- 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 no consensus defaulting to Keep and without prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem ( talk) 05:00, 20 December 2017 (UTC)
- Stephen A. Hope ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
No claim of notability. Doesn't meet WP:NMUSIC or any other SNG. power~enwiki ( π, ν) 03:46, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Baby miss fortune 04:05, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 07:24, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. ~dom Kaos~ ( talk) 13:52, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep Somewhat notable, an emmy nominee and son of an oscar winner. Subuey ( talk) 21:03, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
- @
Subuey: being a relative of a notable person wouldn't be sufficient, per
WP:NOTINHERITED. With regard to the Oscar nominations, could you elaborate? There's nothing about this in the article, and it might help us decide whether this is sufficient to demonstrate notability.
~dom Kaos~ (
talk)
08:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- You can look it up, just look up "emmy", not "oscar", I made a mistake.
Subuey (
talk)
19:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Okay, he's been nominated twice for Emmies: both nominations were for Outstanding Sound Editing for a Miniseries or a Special. Both nominations were for a group of twelve, rather than as a single artiste, so I'm still not convinced this is enough to pass GNG. ~dom Kaos~ ( talk) 21:13, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- You can look it up, just look up "emmy", not "oscar", I made a mistake.
Subuey (
talk)
19:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- @
Subuey: being a relative of a notable person wouldn't be sufficient, per
WP:NOTINHERITED. With regard to the Oscar nominations, could you elaborate? There's nothing about this in the article, and it might help us decide whether this is sufficient to demonstrate notability.
~dom Kaos~ (
talk)
08:52, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete Seems to be a run-of-th-mill industry journeyman. His credits on IMDB are extensive, but as nominator points out nothing turns up when trying to locate independent, third party coverage that would indicate stand out notability. His Emmy nominations were as part of a team of a dozen people working in the Sound Department in various capacities. I agree with the above comment that that is not enough stand alone recognition. Had he actually won, perhaps it could be a stronger argument, but I still think it comes up short. ShelbyMarion ( talk) 21:36, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
- Comment I have to say I am concerned about the tendency to want articles on subjects who are notable in their own field, for example the Fandango biography, to be deleted. Subuey ( talk) 22:22, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 18:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete as per nomination. Whatever his father did is irrelevant. -- Rusf10 ( talk) 19:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Weak delete. This falls under WP:CREATIVE, and I cannot see which inclusion criterion would be met, although he has numerous film credits spanning his career, according to IMDB. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 19:31, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep The article could benefit from editing and some more content. He was clearly notable enough in his profession to warrant an obituary in Variety. 22:42, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- I'm bothered by the notion that just because someone gets an obituary in a notable publication, they are suddenly notable even though they didn't merit an article here while alive. It's almost like a WP:1EVENT, becoming notable simply due to passing. ~ Anachronist ( talk) 22:47, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- An obituary does not establish notability (regardless of the publication in which it appeared). Even the most unotable people still get obituaries.-- Rusf10 ( talk) 22:50, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
- Keep and expand the references meet the standard set at GNG. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) ( talk • contribs) 00:38, 13 December 2017 (UTC)
- Delete -- does not meet WP:ANYBIO and significant RS coverage not found. Being a "member of the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences, the Motion Picture Editors Guild and the American Federation of Musicians" is an insufficient claim of significance, and there's nothing better. Reads like a memorial page. K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:38, 20 December 2017 (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.