Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Travis Gordon (3rd nomination)

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. Since this AFD was filed while the ink on the previous close was still wet, I'll consider them both together. In both AFDs we have 4 keep !votes with the second one in the last AFD being an ITSNOTABLE vague wave. However, in neither one are there any arguments for deletion aside from the 2 nominators. Please wait a few months before renominating this. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:13, 2 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Travis Gordon

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

Webseries creator of questionable notability. First AfD was closed no consensus, and the 2nd AfD had very little participation, and those supporting that the article be kept argued the following:

Keep The Wired article and Ain't It Cool News article mention him sufficiently, he is notable.

This is problematic because these articles are more about his series, and not about the creator. Also, mentions do not fulfill WP:GNG.

Keep Travis is a notable webseries creator

See WP:ITSA.

The creator has been interviewed several times. However, the content of these interviews is clearly focused on the content of the show, and not on Gordon himself. Because Gordon has not received in-depth coverage in independent sources, I recommend deletion. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 23:16, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:53, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The whole coverage in Wired is two paragraphs, but if you add the six or so interviews (longer, but in rather obscure sources), it's just over the WP:GNG threshold, I think. There's also a tint of WP:CREATIVE with the Bronze at WorldFest-Houston International Film Festival. FuFoFuEd (talk) 21:17, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I add that I've considered a merger & redirect to Spellfury, but there's enough coverage of his other creations that doesn't warrant that outcome. FuFoFuEd (talk) 21:24, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep In addressing the nominator's concerns about the earlier AFD and Wired.com and Ain't It Cool News and his worry "This [coverage] is problematic because these articles are more about his series, and not about the creator", I remind him that per WP:SIGCOV, "Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material". Since those articles (and there are others) speak of Gordon directly and in detail, even if not in great detail and even with Gordon not being the main topic of the source material, we have a meeting of WP:SIGCOV. And toward his concern of the previous AFD's "Travis is a notable webseries creator" opinion, I remind that per WP:CREATIVE, if Gordon's works are the recipient of "multiple independent articles or reviews" (see the aforementioned Wired.com and Ain't It Cool News), then as the creator of the web series being so covered, he is notable per the applicable guidelines. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 06:59, 1 August 2011 (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.