Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ryan Dunlap

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The result was Nom withdrawn. Thanks to some excellent source finding, I've w/drawn the nom and will redirect the film's page to the main article for Dunlap.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 21:07, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ryan Dunlap

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

I came across this while looking at currently PRODed articles. A quick look at the article shows a lack of sources and a search brought up nothing that would show that this actor/director/writer is ultimately notable. I couldn't find anything but one sole source [1] that is both independent and reliable, although Tulsa People might not necessarily be considered a RS. I'm also listing his film Greyscale for deletion. While it does exist and has some notable persons involved with it, neither of those things give notability in and of themselves. Neither the film nor its creator seem to meet any of the notability guidelines. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 16:59, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related page for the reasons listed above:

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 17:13, 13 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Ryan Dunlap's AKA: (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Two articles require two opinions... sometimes different. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.}
Delete article on Greyscale (film) for now as being a tad [[premature. Apparently it has completed filming, but not yet been released. Lacking coverage, it fails the caveats of WP:NFF. Redirect for now to Ryan Dunlap. Okay with a return to its author while we wait. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
delete article on Ryan Dunlop. His short career fails WP:FILMMAKER and lack of coverage under either name fails WP:ENT. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:35, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
However, Michael, that is just additional criteria. While it might fail WP:FILMMAKER, it most likely passes WP:BASIC, still allowing it to be kept. It serves the project and the readers well and this should be kept. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:34, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yup... the SNGs do NOT supplant the GNG. They support it. Good rescue, by the way. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Haha many thanks in return. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:52, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP sufficient coverage to establish notability. Bonkers The Clown (Nonsensical Babble) 08:26, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep article on Ryan Dunlap per improvements and sourcing showing GNG is met even while weak on ENT. This one we can keep and further improve over time and with regular editing. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 08:49, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good job guys! Now this is why I like taking things to AfD rather than just PRODing them- I know that there's a chance that someone could find sources that I might have missed!Tokyogirl79 (talk) 09:56, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawing the nomination. We can keep the main article and redirect the other to the main one for him.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 14:29, 14 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm closing it myself. I don't know if I can or can't do this, but I'll give it a whirl.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 21:07, 14 December 2012 (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.