Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cavan Cunningham

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! 19:10, 1 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Cavan Cunningham

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

Doesn't meet WP:GNG or WP:ENT. Boleyn (talk) 19:01, 21 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 00:59, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. An actor is not automatically entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because he's had roles — having roles is the job description, so if all an actor had to do was list roles then we'd have to keep an article about every actor who exists. What passes WP:NACTOR, rather, is not the list of roles itself, but the quality of reliable sourcing that can be provided to show that he received enough media coverage for the having of roles to clear WP:GNG — but two of the three sources here just namecheck his existence a single time in coverage of the show, without containing enough content about him to contribute toward passing GNG, and the third source is his own self-published website. And as for the Gemini Awards, those were ensemble nominations for the entire cast, not nominations that singled him out for standalone recognition as a supporting or guest actor, so they're not "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be sourced better than this. As always, no prejudice against recreation in the future if and when somebody can reference a new article much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 18:15, 25 February 2018 (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.