Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sebastian Elmaloglou
Appearance
- Sebastian Elmaloglou (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
fails WP:ENT. only 1 notable role. LibStar (talk) 05:21, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- N/A0 05:35, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- N/A0 05:36, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- Addendum simply appearing on a notable TV series with cult following does not mean that this individual is automatically notable. I also question his role as "notable" in the video releases due to a lack of evidence. so he fails all 3 criteria of WP:ENT in my opinion, no notable multiple roles (yes we can confirm multiple roles but not necessarily notable), no large fan base of Sebastian and obviously no major contribution to this field. LibStar (talk) 02:51, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep per passing WP:ENT. First for having a notable role in multiple episodes of a notable series which has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following, and second for also having notable roles in 2 full-length video releases based upon that notable series. Article requires expansion and additional sourcing, a surmountable issue that does not require deletion. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 22:31, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
- how do you know he has notable roles in the videos, the videos are spin offs of the TV series which the same set of actors and production crew. it's a grey area whether this counts as multiple series. LibStar (talk) 01:19, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- As an actor myself, it is not grey to me. You argument is akin to declaring that the Rocky (film series) is all one project. Had he not been important to script and film, production would have not brought him over for the two non-tv feature-length video films, as they did not include all the series' actors. Notable then is notable now, even with his career having stopped in 2004. Or are you now denying the show's notability, or reversing yourself from your opening statement that his role in the series is notable? Or are you denying its (still) strong cult following? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following" refers to the individual not the show. there is no evidence that Sebastian Elmaloglou has a cult following, the show he acts on does, but it does not follow that all actors on this show are automatically notable. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- We are not discussing "all actors"... only this one... and you yourself said his role was notable in your opening comments. And "cult following" can apply to individuals OR shows (IE: Rocky Horror Picture Show). And even a modest search finds that Max Sutherland of Home and Away has his followers. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- read WP:ENT again, it clearly refers to cult following of individual not based on shows/films they've appeared on. using your logic, anyone appearing on Home and Away gets automatic notability. LibStar (talk) 02:50, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- We are not discussing "all actors"... only this one... and you yourself said his role was notable in your opening comments. And "cult following" can apply to individuals OR shows (IE: Rocky Horror Picture Show). And even a modest search finds that Max Sutherland of Home and Away has his followers. Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:47, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- "Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following" refers to the individual not the show. there is no evidence that Sebastian Elmaloglou has a cult following, the show he acts on does, but it does not follow that all actors on this show are automatically notable. LibStar (talk) 02:24, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- As an actor myself, it is not grey to me. You argument is akin to declaring that the Rocky (film series) is all one project. Had he not been important to script and film, production would have not brought him over for the two non-tv feature-length video films, as they did not include all the series' actors. Notable then is notable now, even with his career having stopped in 2004. Or are you now denying the show's notability, or reversing yourself from your opening statement that his role in the series is notable? Or are you denying its (still) strong cult following? Schmidt, MICHAEL Q. 02:03, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep: Passes WP:ENT. Joe Chill (talk) 00:26, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- could you please explain how he meets this criterion. thanks. LibStar (talk) 01:02, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- I thought that it would be obvious that it's the same thing as what Schmidt said. Joe Chill (talk) 01:16, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- Keep Everyone seems to get this but the nominator. The notable shows the actor has been on, makes them notable. See how many blue links there are? Those are notable series, thus the actor has a notable career. Dream Focus 03:49, 16 June 2010 (UTC)
- wonder how you stumbled on this one, Dream Focus, read WP:ENT, appearing on a notable series does not equate to automatic notability for every single actor on it. I've already explained how it fails WP:ENT on all 3 subcriteria. LibStar (talk) 03:53, 16 June 2010 (UTC)