Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Scott

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. Michig (talk) 08:38, 18 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Scott

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

WP:BLP, based entirely on primary sources with not a shred of reliable source coverage shown, of a person whose only potentially valid Wikipedia notability claim is as a producer of low-budget independent horror films. Being a film producer does not entitle a person to an automatic "no sourcing required" inclusion freebie, but the level of reliable source coverage needed to get him in the door is not locatable. The only sources present here are his primary source profiles on the website of the city council that he also happens to serve on -- but city councillors don't get over WP:NPOL just for being city councillors. Delete. Bearcat (talk) 02:00, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; clearly non-notable. Couldn't find any coverage about him. Best, FoCuS contribs; talk to me! 02:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 03:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 03:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 03:59, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Abjectly fails WP:GNG. AusLondonder (talk) 10:00, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as there's nothing minimally acceptable including for any applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 07:20, 14 May 2016 (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.