Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Stallings (model)

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. Cbrown1023 talk 00:49, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Stallings (model)

John Stallings (model) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

PRODded as "Not notable; fails WP:BIO.", deprodded with no fix, I think by a vandal, but whatever, let's get this resolved. I concur, not notable. DMacks 14:41, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete vanity spam --Kevin Murray 18:19, 17 March 2007 (UTC)
• Keep - passes WP:BIO as a television personality involved with well known television productions, specifically Manhunt and two seasons of The Janice Dickinson Modeling Agency. The article is not "vanity spam" as there appears to be no involvement by the subject in the creating or editing of the article, and even if there were that would not in and of itself constitute grounds for deletion. Otto4711 18:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• Independent source. Another independent source. Otto4711 18:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

• Delete. Not notable. (I was the original prodder.) This guy is just another struggling model with no claim to fame; he's not offered the industry anything special and isn't prolific. His status as a "television personality" was appearing on a few episodes of a reality television show; he didn't establish a dramatic character. -- Mikeblas 19:04, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

• Can you point to the section of WP:BIO that requires that the subject "offer the industry anything special" or "establish a dramatic character"? Because all the WP:BIO that I read said was that they had to have "appeared in well-known ... television productions." Stallings was not just in "a few episodes of a reality television series." He was a featured cast member of two different shows (three, if one counts the Christmas with the Dickinsons special as a separate show but still two regardless) including appearing in almost every episode of two seasons of one show. So he meets the specific notability guideline for entertainers. He has also been "the subject of ... multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject" (two of which are linked in this discussion and also in his article) so he meets the general notability guideline. I'm unclear as to why you would think that an article whose subject passes both WP:BIO and WP:NOTE should be deleted, but since your prod was specifically addressing WP:BIO and he passes it, there is no valid basis offered for deletion. Otto4711 21:02, 21 March 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.