Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lang Jeffries

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. (non-admin closure) NNADIGOODLUCK (Talk|Contribs) 14:44, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lang Jeffries

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No indication this actor meets WP:NACTOR, having a starring role in only one TV show. The four sources include three IMDB pages and the SSDI. Page was created by a serial copyright violater, so simply redirecting to that TV show won't just do it if we're stuck with the original article's edit history. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Romania-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Spain-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. ミラ P 02:46, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't meet WP:SOLDIER Mztourist (talk) 08:21, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No, but that's not his claim to fame. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:09, 23 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Never said it was, but it showed up here and those are the only relevant individual criteria for Military Deletion Discussions. Mztourist (talk) 05:24, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - That's my point. It's not a military deletion discussion. He's notable (if he is notable) only as an actor, not as a soldier. -- Necrothesp (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think I see a baby in this bathwater. Will look for sources. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 13:37, 24 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I worked on the article today, and I did indeed find a baby in the bathwater. The subject was the lead in a number of films as well as the television show for which he was first known. He appears in a number of books I found on Google Books and in many newspaper articles. Many, of course, are more passing mentions, but others have more content related to him. He passes WP:GNG and WP:ENT now (and I can elaborate on how if this comes into question), but I would like to find more sources to strengthen the article. However, the timing of this nomination makes it difficult for me to go to a local university library and access entertainment archives collections as that library's hours are different between the semester and over the holidays. If my existing efforts are not enough to make this a KEEP, please consider postponing deletion at least until a week into January when I can check out the sources I need. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 02:21, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @DiamondRemley39: The article creator is currently having his content presumptively deleted indiscriminately, so everything in the article he added must still be cleaned out, which is why I'll just let this AFD run its course. ミラ P 18:18, 25 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment My contributions are mostly complete here. I added info from and cited his Variety obituary. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 21:59, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 14:19, 30 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because of additions made by DiamondRemley39.NotButtigieg (talk) 14:59, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Weird rationale: "No indication this actor meets WP:NACTOR, having a starring role in only one TV show." Maybe only one TV show, but plenty of notable movies, and as the lead actor. --151.54.254.128 (talk) 17:12, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment reply I found rationale odd too, but then I learned that users are deleting articles by this article's creator because that user was a serial copyright violator. Article/citations were not in great shape before, and nominator apparently not interested in completing WP:BEFORE and instead wants to throw the subject out of the encyclopedia. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 17:25, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are right, but besides copyright issues, the "starring role in only one TV show" and the "redirecting to that TV show" remarks indicate the nominator did not just avoided any WP:BEFORE, but didn't even bother to read the whole text of the article, from which it was clear enough Jeffries had starred in several (bluelinked) movies. BTW this is the difference between the original article by the serial copyright violator and the current one, I think any possible copyright concern has been overcome. Thank you DiamondRemley39 for improving the article. --151.54.254.128 (talk) 20:44, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes WP:GNG.-Splinemath (talk) 23:56, 5 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Definitely meets WP:NACTOR, with significant roles in multiple notable productions - which appeared to be evident before the nomination for AfD, although it's much clearer now, thanks to DiamondRemley39. RebeccaGreen (talk) 08:29, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: easily passes the notability standards. Definite keep. Dflaw4 (talk) 08:41, 6 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.