- 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 Draftify. Liz Read! Talk! 23:21, 18 July 2025 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Stuart Laws (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:BLP of a stand-up comedian, not referenced to any evidence of WP:GNG-worthy coverage in reliable sources. As always, comedians are not inherently notable just for existing, and have to show coverage about them and their work to pass GNG -- but this is referenced entirely to primary sources (comedy special sourced to own broadcaster, appearances at comedy clubs sourced to the self-published websites of those clubs, etc.) with not a single hit of GNG-worthy media coverage about him shown at all.
As he's British, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody with deeper access to British media can salvage it with proper sourcing -- but again, notability is not established by using primary sources to verify that he did a thing, it resides in the amount of media coverage he did or didn't get about the thing he did, and nothing here is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to pass GNG on proper media coverage. Bearcat (talk) 14:38, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Entertainment and United Kingdom. Bearcat (talk) 14:38, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Businesspeople, Radio, Television, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:42, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- Delete. The article does not appear to meet the WP:GNG or WP:ENTERTAINER notability guidelines. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 18:30, 4 July 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback, @Bearcat: — I've updated the article with more independent sources from The Guardian and Variety. Let me know if more is needed and I can look for a few more UK sources. Berlination (talk) 14:21, 5 July 2025 (UTC)
- This wiki has hardly been up at all, I don't see the point in deleting it when it has not had the time to receive any sort of proper editing and/or sources> Acolakes (talk) 03:54, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Sufficient sourcing to establish that the subject is notable enough to have a Wikipedia article at all has to be present in the article the moment it's even created in the first place. The article doesn't already have to be perfect, but it does have to already have enough proper reliable sourcing in it to establish that the subject passes GNG in the first place — and because anybody can create a bad article about anything whether it's improvable with better sourcing or not, articles are not exempted from having to have legitimate GNG-worthy sourcing in them just because they're new. Which is why "the article is new, give it time" is listed as an argument to avoid in AFD discussions — the rule is "proper sourcing now", not "articles get grace periods to rest on bad sourcing pending the future addition of better sources that haven't already been shown to exist". Bearcat (talk) 13:29, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Draftify I don't think this article meets GNG currently, but it is a new article and could be improved with more time so it would be preferable to draftify and incubate it. I think the subject probably meets second criteria of WP:ENT, especially in their role for the industry in writing and directing for many major British comedians. Some secondary sources which could potentially be added in future include Broadway World, Guardian, Scotsman, although more need to be added too. Happily888 (talk) 15:39, 7 July 2025 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Left guide (talk) 18:25, 11 July 2025 (UTC)- I added more content and sources to this, including UK news sources. Berlination (talk) 15:33, 12 July 2025 (UTC)
- Draftify - I have run a WP:BEFORE search. It is not the most clear-cut example over secondary widespread coverage, however keeping in the mainspace is probably not the best call. Although many of the available sources are interviews, many of these interviews include information that is from the interviewer/article rather than the subject, and would be a softindication of notability under WP:IV. Naturally more sources are needed on top of these, but I see this as a very realistic possibility.
- sksatsuma 18:38, 13 July 2025 (UTC)
- Additional comment: In its current form, the article relies significantly on primary sources and trivial sources. It appears that enough reliable secondary sources exist to demonstrate notability, but significant re-writing of the article is needed. sksatsuma 20:34, 13 July 2025 (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.