Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Almánza

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 speedy deleted, CSD A7: Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject, and salted. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 17:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Andrew Almánza

Andrew Almánza (edit | 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 assertion of adequate notability. Not enough coverage in independent, reliable sources to verify or sustian article. Fails general notability guidelines, WP:NACTOR. After removing all of the citations to Instagram, torrent sites, blogs etc there was nothing left. Bit actor with bit parts. Jbh^Talk 12:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Jbh^Talk 12:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Jbh^Talk 12:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Jbh^Talk 12:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. Jbh^Talk 12:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Is it going to be deleted?166.176.184.76 (talk) 13:32, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Likely so. Wikipedia requires that the subjects of articles be notable by Wikipedia standards. You can read our General Notability Guidelines and the specific guidelines for actors to see what that means. In general there must be significant coverage in independent, third party, reliable sources. Not blogs, not Instagram, not IMDB but rather newspapers, magazines, books etc. Even in those cases the articles must be independent to the subject, not PR pieces or from their agent etc.

I could find nothing like that for this person but if you can find good sources that meet our requirements then the article could be kept. This AfD will run for at least a week so you have some time if you want to improve the article.

Also, please do not link to torrent sites, download sites etc. It is not permitted. Thank you. Jbh^Talk 13:41, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Comment There will be discussion here for a week before a decision can be made. GedUK  13:43, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

His name was in each of those references for The Librarians and Mystery Diners166.176.184.76 (talk) 13:50, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

• Delete per yesterday's AfD at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Philip Almanza. Nothing has changed since then. /wiae /tlk 13:51, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for that link. Tagged for WP:CSD#G4. Jbh^Talk 14:06, 3 February 2016 (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.