Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nicholas McAnulty
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:50, 20 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Nicholas McAnulty (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
fails WP:BIO and WP:ENT. third party coverage verifies his appearance in 1 film but does not really say anything more than that and he is usually mentioned with a number of actors. [1]. LibStar (talk) 14:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Nicholas McAnulty plays a major role in the movie throughout from A to Z. Sure, at age of 6, obviously, he cannot have had a series of roles to prove notability, but he landed himself a truly major role, amd based on this particular performance, it makes him quite notable. He appears on the official movie poster for example. In a majority of the reviews and pictures included from the movie, he appears as a major character alongside father and older brother. For example "San Francisco Journal" [2]. Or the Hollywood Interview [3]. Even in red carpet ceremonies, he is prominently featured. For example: [4], [5] werldwayd (talk) 04:55, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:ENT clearly states multiple roles. also just because he is aged 6 does not mean we relax the criteria for him. LibStar (talk) 01:07, 9 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:55, 11 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete without prejudice toward recreation. If WP:ENT is not met, WP:GNG becomes the determinant. That he is written of in numerous reliable sources is to be considered toward his possible meeting of WP:BLP. However, since that coverage is for that one role, this seems to be WP:BLP1E. Let him get another role and receive coverage for that as well, and he may then better meet WP:BIO. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]- Keep Struck my opinion above. Per Mosman Daily, Back Stage, IGN, Hollywood Reporter, ABC.net, Sun Times, and the supporting articles found in Google archives, the subject appears to meet the WP:GNG. Yes, the article needs expansion, cleanup, and proper sourcing... but these are to be accomplished through normal editing... not deletion. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 03:27, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Coffee // have a cup // flagged revs now! // 11:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Once again, MichaelQSchmidt has found sources proving notability. Did you know he is an actor himself in real life as well? Dream Focus 01:36, 19 December 2009 (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.