Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robby Sharpe

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 delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:17, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Robby Sharpe

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

Speedy declined, and I'm sure a prod would be challenged as well. So, bring this to AfD. Non-notable voice actor. Some of the article claims can be verified via databases; Anime News Network and IMDb. There are also a few articles out there which verify voice acting credits, but nothing that talks about the subject in detail to meet WP:GNG. Has won no awards or critical acclaim to meet WP:CREATIVE. Akerans (talk) 00:40, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:48, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
D per nom. This guy is NN, though eligible for protracted, painful deletion. -- Y not? 03:52, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as not notable. GregJackP Boomer! 04:49, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Page now is reliable, has referance's and has some notable credits added (from reilable source's). - User:MegaHL90 02:20, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - please check WP:RS and WP:V for information on reliable and verifiable sources. The sources that were added are neither. Regards, GregJackP Boomer! 03:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A few anime voice roles, and a few very minor appearances on stage; even the links provided give credit only for "Ensemble" [1] [2] in what appear to be his biggest claims to fame, The Pursuit of Persephone and The Book of the Dun Cow. --MelanieN (talk) 20:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment User:174.20.100.164 edited my comment above, changing my "delete" !vote to "keep". I just changed it back to delete. Please understand that changing other people's !votes or comments in this kind of discussion is a STRONG no-no. --MelanieN (talk) 22:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep Give the page a chance, reference's may not look reliable, however, all things listed on the page are fact, not fiction. 21:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.20.100.164 (talk) — 174.20.100.164 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Nobody is claiming that the things in the article are not true. The point is that even if everything claimed is true, it doesn't add up to notability as defined by Wikipedia. --MelanieN (talk) 22:23, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mandsford 02:18, 13 September 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Delete No significant roles. No prejudice against re-creation should he later become notable. Edward321 (talk) 05:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep Does it matter, their are more then 100 article's on Wikipedia with non-notable actor pages or stubs. He also may become notable later because of the fact that he's a voice actor. Gundam Unicorn and Three Delivery are very notable, and on top of that, reference's state him being in many theater productions. How does that not follow both WP:RS and WP:V. - User:174.20.47.250 20:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC) — 174.20.47.250 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Delete NN. Yes, he may be notable someday but other stuff exists is not a good argument for keep—Sandahl (talk) 20:58, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment/Keep~~ I'm sure that 60% of everything on Robby Sharpe's article falls under both WP:RS and WP:V, plus, even though the reference's can some what be arguable, they are proof that it's not fake or non-legitimate. - User:174.20.47.250 21:10, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm striking out your second and third "keep" !votes here. You can comment as much as you like, but you only get one !vote. --MelanieN (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

~~Strong Keep~~ What User:174.20.47.250 said. - User:MegaHL90 22:49, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am striking out your second !vote as well. You already said "keep" above. --MelanieN (talk) 14:48, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Undoubtedly exists. Undoubtedly fails to meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. I'm sure the closing admin won't need to have the multiple !votes from the same user and IP pointed out to them, but I undoubtedly just did... Bigger digger (talk) 04:41, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
~~Comment/Strong Keep~~ The other stuff I guess is questionable, however, it technically does not fall under the other stuff exists list. It arguable, but personally (not fact), I think it does fall under WP:RS and WP:V, even though it does fail to meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC. - User:174.20.47.250 22:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep/Comment - Wikipedia articles have their own text of info, iit's unfair that this one should be treated this way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.169.64.15 (talk) 15:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Absolute Keep Agreeing with 204.169.64.15. It does fail to meet WP:GNG or WP:BASIC, doesn't mean it has to be removed from Wikipedia. Just as he said, there are tons of other article that haven't been noticed, it's all most like everyone is being racist agasinst the page itself just because it isn't perfect. I think it does fall under the WP:RS and WP:V. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.30.234.212 (talk) 23:16, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

...and two more anonymous users show up here to argue for "keep" - but without providing any valid arguments. Guys, this isn't helping your cause. The administrator who closes this discussion, and makes the decision whether to keep or delete, will not base the decision on how many "votes" there were on each side. They will base the decision on the arguments made, how strong a case is made for keeping or deleting the article, based on Wikipedia's standards. To say, as you just did, that an article should be kept even if it doesn't meet Wikipedia's standards is not going to get you anywhere. Claiming "unfairness" or "racism" (huh?) is also not going to get you anywhere. If you want to keep the article, FIND RELIABLE SOURCES showing that he is notable, and add them to the article. If you can't find reliable sources as defined by Wikipedia, then the article is going to go. We try not to have articles here that aren't based on reliable sources - especially articles about living people. --MelanieN (talk) 00:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I just don't see the sources to convince me of notability VASterling (talk) 13:42, 18 September 2010 (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.