Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bevan J. Leisner

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. NW (Talk) 14:33, 5 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bevan J. Leisner

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

Bio article about a non-notable actor. Searching for Bevan J. Leisner, along with the name of one of his films bring up NO results. No media coverage.
This page's name is a way to avoid the history of the article Bevan Leisner, which has been CSD'd 3 times.mboverload @ 06:01, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This individual's career falls considerably short of the notability requirements; she is a 13-year-old who makes films with no professional distribution. Accounting4Taste:talk 13:09, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This actress has a considerable following in Oregon and her films have been seen at International FIlm Festivals all over the country. Madameovary (talk) 17:16, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete without prejudice toward recreation if and/or when this individual's career grows and she gets coverage. For now, the article is simply Too Soon. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:43, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Another non-notable actor. Even User:Madameovary's comments here aren't backed by a reliable source. Note Bevan Leisner, Forrest Leisner, and Matt Francis are all related (wikt:familially), have all been through multiple AFDs, and so on. tedder (talk) 03:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletion discussions. -- tedder (talk) 03:24, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - fails notability. Aboutmovies (talk) 04:23, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Clearly fails to meet basic standards of verifiability through reliable, published sources. Unverifiable bios, especially of living people, are ripe for deletion. Steven Walling 05:07, 29 June 2010 (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.