Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Trax Colton

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 no consensus.  Sandstein  12:37, 1 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trax Colton (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:ANYBIO, WP:NACTOR, WP:GNG. Boston.Com source is book review that only mentions subject in passing, IMDb is not considered to be a reliable source. Makes unsourced assertions and promulgates rumors about subject. No reliable information appears to be available about subject after appearance in second movie (1960's The Marriage-Go-Round) so there are also WP:BLP concerns since subject could still be living. Shearonink (talk) 23:51, 28 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. sst✈ 01:31, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete by all means as simply nothing here suggests even a minimally better article. SwisterTwister talk 06:06, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Given his lead role in It Happened in Athens, Colton explicitly meets the standards of WP:NACTOR, despite the misrepresentation of this inarguable fact in the nomination. The article needs additional sources and cleanup, but the sources are available from older newspaper archives and need for cleanup is not a valid argument for deletion. Alansohn (talk) 23:21, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No misrepresentation was intended. I was unable to find multiple in-depth reliable sources, so if you have access to that kind of info it would be great. I would be interested in knowing how Colton/Morelli fulfills WP:NACTOR:

• Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.
• Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
• Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

Shearonink (talk) 00:34, 30 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This article has plenty of sources to satisfy notability guidelines, as well as notable roles. Readers want to see this kind of info on actors, especially the average film buff. Tinton5 (talk) 06:24, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. I just don't think Morelli/Colton fulfills the actor/notability parameters. He is interesting to movie buffs because of 1)his short fling with Jayne Mansfield & 2)his association with the notorious Harry Willson but 3)he had one very minor role (as the unnamed "Crew Cut/Party Guest") in The Marriage-Go-Round and 4)a single lead role in one film and then disappeared from Hollywood. Does he have a large fan base? Has he made unique or prolific contributions to entertainment? Has he had significant roles in multiple notable films and/or television shows? Most of the sources I have found mirror the same few facts: used-car salesman, asserted birthdate, gossip - was he one of Willson's party-boys?/the brief Mansfield affair, or are a passing mention. For instance, Reference #3 (a blurb from a 1961 Mike Connolly Pittsburgh Press/syndicated column) says this (in full):

Another remake of "Blood and Sand" is simmering at Fox. This time it's for Trax Colton, who looms as the studio's new "combination Rudolph Valentino - Ty Power," thanks to his work as Jayne Mansfield's co-star in "It Happened in Athens."

So far, I have been unable to find any in-depth interviews or articles about Morelli/Colton, much less multiple sources. If the parent biographical notability guidelines are consulted, Colton fails WP:ANYBIO because he has not received a well-known and significant award or honor/has not been nominated for one several times/has not made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. Also, so far as I can tell (and believe me, I have been looking), Morelli/Colton has not received in-depth coverage - no book/biography has been written specifically about Morelli/Colton, etc. Shearonink (talk) 18:55, 2 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:25, 3 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I mean seriously, just because Colton had just two movies roles doesn't discharge him from having a Wikipedia page. I mean, when someone reads Jayne Mansfield's biography that won't even be able to click on the "unknown" Colton, even if they want to. There are many other actors and actresses that have Wikipedia pages that weren't too well-known and that only appeared in B-movies. Please think about this. (ClassicEditor97)— Preceding unsigned comment added by ClassicEditor97 (talk • contribs) 15:34, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

• Comment. Just because someone was in two movies doesn't mean they are notable. Just because some actor is a member of SAG or of AFTRA doesn't make them notable. Just because someone was a bit player during the waning years of the classic studio system doesn't mean they are notable. Just because someone had a brief affair with a movie star doesn't make them notable - not every person Miss Mansfield had an affair with who is mentioned in her article has a Wikipedia article of their own - her lawyer Sam Brody, Paris nightclub owner Claude Terrail, producer Enrico Bomba. (How long were Morelli/Colton and Mansfield lovers anyway? Was it a long-term relationship, were they lovers for a week or even a few weeks?)

Our discussion here should center on the notability guidelines of WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:NACTOR. Does Morelli/Colton fulfill any of them? If he does not, then he should not have a Wikipedia article. Are there multiple reliable sources that contain in-depth information about Morelli/Colton? Not just passing mentions like the Mike Connolly column, but a biography or long-form articles in magazines or newspapers? Has he had a lasting impact on film-acting or the culture in general? Did he win any acting awards? Please think about this logically... Just because Morelli/Colton can be thought of as notorious (because of his discovery by the scandal-plagued Harry Willson and his fling with Mansfield) doesn't mean he is notable - it means he is worthy of gossip. Shearonink (talk) 17:03, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. Two articles by this name (at least one of which was unsourced), were deleted per WP:BLPROD & per WP:PROD in September 2011. Shearonink (talk) 02:17, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Meets GNG and there is enough information for a standalone article. The GNG does not require "in-depth information" from a single source, 10 facts coming from 5 sources is mathematically the same as all 10 from one source. Some times we have to do actual research and create a biography from disparate sources, instead of just giving a synopsis of an existing biography. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 05:54, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. He had a brief affair with Jayne Mansfield. He was an actor with one bit part in one movie and one lead in another. He was a renamed protégée of Harry Willson. Many of the references simply repeat the same information - the affair With Mansfield, that Willson was his agent, that he seemingly disappeared from Hollywood. This person is not notable as an actor under those parameters: he received no in-depth coverage during his time as a contract player, he has had no enduring influence on his art, he received no known awards, he was not the lead in multiple notable films. In all the references I have found he received passing mentions in the Hollywood studios' publicity machine - a sentence here, a phrase there. To me, that does not indicate he fulfills the WIkipedia general notability guidelines:

"If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. "Significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail, so that no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it need not be the main topic of the source material.

I just don't see the significant coverage, that Morelli's life and his career are covered directly and covered in detail. Shearonink (talk) 06:31, 5 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - as much as I like attempting to save articles on lesser known actors, there is simply not enough in-depth coverage to show that he passes WP:GNG, and he clearly doesn't pass WP:NACTOR. The best case could be made by WP:BASIC, but I don't feel he meets those criteria either. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:33, 14 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment To pass WP:NACTOR he only has to meet one of the 3 criteria, not all of them, and then there is RSources.Atlantic306 (talk) 21:08, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Good point about WP:NACTOR, so I decided to take a look at the three criteria:

Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions.

A small part is not significant...the character in The Marriage-Go-Round didn't have a name, he was simply "Crew Cut/Party Guest". Colton/Morelli had one co-starring role in a single movie, a movie that did not make back its $1million+ budget, did not get any awards, received almost-universally bad reviews.

Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.

Large fan base or significant "cult" following... The only claim I can see that might have some merit on the "cult" issue is that he was one of the many clients of the notorious Harry Willson but that would seem to be gossip-fodder material not encyclopedic content.

Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

His work was not unique, he was not prolific, and he was not innovative. He was a small cog in the Hollywood machine.

Shearonink (talk) 23:52, 23 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The significant coverage is simply not here. After looking over the sources provided and doing additional searches (including a newspapers.com search). I could not find significant coverage of Colton to adequately support an article. Winner 42 Talk to me! 02:34, 24 January 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.