Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robbie Curran

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Robbie Curran (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)

Contested prod. Non-notable article that appears to have been created as an autobiography. Ridernyc (talk) 17:07, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• The first sentence rather blows the gaffe: known for his role as Max in the upcoming thriller Island. Famous for being in a film that hasn't appeared yet? I think not. Delete. Can be re-created if and when he is famous. Emeraude (talk) 17:47, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - That opening sentence is not the way the article was originally worded. The HorrorBid article outright states the film premiered in December making this a 2011 film. I am attempting to cleanup the article to help address the issues raised. There are sentences particularly in the Early life section that I will remove as they are unreferenced. Can anyone help me improve this article? FilmFan2011 (talk) 17:53, 20 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:03, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per WP:TOSOON. While I would otherwise be glad to assist, we have a three major problems: 1) Apparently Robby has done only one film,[1] and that has him fail the criteria set at WP:NACTOR. 2) We have a lack of multiple and reliable sources speaking about him. The citation to Gather.com is a social networking site, and it and IMDB and Casting Call Pro are unacceptable as citations. While it is nice that he can be sourced to Buried, and Horrorbid, those sources are generally considered unreliable for Wikipedia use. 3) But what is worse, is that at this current time in his career, the limited coverage he does have is for only one thing. I would suggest this be userfied to editor FilmFan2011 as an userspace work-in-progress. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:15, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that FilmFan2011 is suspected of being a sock of an account whose main purpose here is to create promotional articles for this small group of film makers. Ridernyc (talk) 14:46, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If suspicions about this 16-month-old account are proven to be true, then yes... userfication would be inappropriate. But if they remain only suspicions, then userfication might allow a problematic editor to better learn our ways. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:13, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Not notable - hasn't had significant roles in multiple films, hasn't originated a new style/technique of acting, doesn't have historical importance, hasn't received wide press coverage. Note that the film he's been in, Island (film) hasn't been widely released and the article is subject of an AfD. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:11, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Not notable - Robbie21192 (talk) 17:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC) I am the subject of this article, and I do not want this page to exist for a number of reasons.[reply]

  1) I am not a notable actor and wish for this to be removed, for I wish for my privacy to be respected.

  2) I have not given 'FilmFan2011' permission to write this article about me, and I wish for him/her to reveal him/herself so I can find out why he/she has posted false "facts" about me on the internet without my permission and without concrete proof.

  3) The existence of this page has caused me and my colleagues unnecessary stress and many of my associates believe that I wrote this article, which I did not. Please, I would like to put an end to this as soon as possible.

  Thank you for reading, Robbie Curran Robbie21192 (talk) 17:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robbie21192 (talk • contribs) 16:56, 21 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  Blanking the page as either an anonymous IP or as yourself[2] is not the solution. But with the article lacking proper sources and verifiability, it looks like your wish will be granted soon enough. As for wanting the identity of another contributor, he's anonymous and no one here knows just who he is. However, you might ask him questions on his talk page. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:13, 21 May 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.