Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Rudd (2nd nomination)

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, without prejudice against restoration to draft in the event that non-promotional sources can be found (or arise in response to future endeavors). Low-participation editors citing poor sources are given little weight in this calculation. BD2412 T 02:19, 31 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Jeremy Rudd (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Lacks notability; fails WP:NACTOR. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Washington. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:49, 16 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• keep-Actor has been be a recurring actor in the Show TV show 'City on a hill" and co lead in the netflix flim "Burning Sands". I have seen actor appear on Deadline, Hollywood reporter, Varity and other reliable new sources. I'll added them to his list of references by end of today today or by 12/18/2022 Bradhowell65 (talk) 22:05, 16 December 2022 (UTC) — Bradhowell65 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
• Delete. Only roles in major productions have been bit parts and extra-type work. Roles aren't significant, so fails WP:NACTOR. - MrOllie (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - Meets WP:BASIC due several articles. "People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other." Articles include gritdaily, Hollywood Reporter, Sheen Magazine, E! Online and a few others.Greenacacia (talk) 22:33, 20 December 2022 (UTC) — Greenacacia (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  Hollywood reporter and and E! Online are both labelled sponsored content. The Grit Daily contributor's bio calls them an expert in SEO, and all their articles have a distinct promotional feel. According to their media kit, Sheen magazine publishes interviews online for payment. This is somebody with an active PR presence, but I don't believe any of this coverage is independent. - MrOllie (talk) 12:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:45, 23 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or better Speedy delete. Sourced with spammy articles - clearly fails WP:GNG per MrOllie. 129.119.55.36 (talk) 15:21, 30 December 2022 (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.