Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nick Palumbo (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 04:48, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nick Palumbo

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/Nick Palumbo Articles for deletion/Nick Palumbo (2nd nomination)
Nick Palumbo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

For one thing, the article was probably created by and written by either Palumbo himself or one of his shills; the entire thing read like a huge press release (quotes include, but are not limited to, "This was as gentle as a droplet of rain compared to the maelstrom to come with his next slasher film", "Palumbo once more wanted to tackle the slasher genre. However this time, going to Hell would not be easy, and the hard part would be ever leaving", "It seemed everyone involved with the film were ashamed with their involvement and hoped that it would simply go away. Everyone that is except for Nick Palumbo. This was his dream, and he was not going to let it go down without a fight" and so forth) and most of the other edits that the creators made were just inserting Palumbo's name into various articles. (This is not hard to believe; Palumbo is known to spam various messageboards to promote his films) When I reported it to WP:BLP the entire thing was all but removed.

Second, he's not really notable. He's made two or three underground films which don't even have their own articles. Although there is a bit of press surrounding his last film (Murder-Set-Pieces) its mostly due to his attempts to promote the film. There's very few links from other articles. CyberGhostface 00:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Delete Ditto SpecialAgentUncleTito 00:54, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete - Per nom, WP:BIO, and WP:NOTE. NSR77 TC 00:59, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - present articles are fine. On the border of notability.--ZayZayEM 01:24, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - It appears this article satisfies both WP:BIO and WP:NOTE, albeit barely. --Evb-wiki 01:36, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable even if it is for the wrong reasons Guycalledryan 02:42, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, unless more reliable sources are forthcoming. One source isn't very good evidence of notability. -Amarkov moo! 03:07, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I'd like to note that most (not all) of the supporters thus far have even admitted that this article barely satisfies the requirements and is notable for the wrong reasons. I've seen more important articles get deleted for less.--CyberGhostface 03:13, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
Barely satisfies the requirements means he does satisfy the requirements, and therefore should be included. Notable for the wrong reasons was because he was called the "the lowest form of cinematic life", not for trivial reasons Guycalledryan 04:38, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, He is notable in his genre. Callelinea 04:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep present article is very poor, but he's directed at least one rather notable film. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:33, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and create an article for Murder-Set-Pieces. There is not one reliable source in the article (RottenTomatoes is not a reliable source), and Palumbo is not a notable film director. His film, however, is. Well, sort of. Anyway, making one semi-notable film doesn't qualify the director for a separate article. Rockstar (T/C) 15:31, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as a notable figure within the horror genre. Hopefully this can be expanded beyond a micro-stub. (jarbarf) 03:24, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
    • If, later, some reliable source comes up that will let us extend it beyond a microstub, then we can create a new article. But not even the most ardent eventualist would claim that we must keep every article which might theoretically be able to be expanded. -Amarkov moo! 03:28, 14 July 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep about as narrow a notability as I've seen in 5 months. I'm becoming a darn inclusionist! Bearian 00:21, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
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.