Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Carson (actor)

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. ✗plicit 14:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paul Carson (actor)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Biography of an actor, not making any strong or properly sourced claim to passing WP:NACTOR. The strongest notability claim on offer here is that he once temporarily replaced the lead actor in a repertory theatre production in 1962 -- but that's not an automatic notability freebie in and of itself, and all of the other roles listed here are supporting or bit parts rather than major roles that would clinch passage of NACTOR #1.
And the sourcing isn't cutting it for getting him over WP:GNG, either: four of the ten footnotes are to genealogical records found in FamilySearch, which we are not allowed to use as referencing for Wikipedia content; one is his alumni profile on the self-published website of his own alma mater, which is not support for notability; one is a book which glancingly namechecks his existence on one page without being about him in any non-trivial sense, being cited only to support the fact that he studied Russian in university rather than anything that would constitute a notability claim; and of the four citations that actually come from WP:GNG-worthy periodicals, three of them also just glancingly namecheck his existence rather than being about him in any meaningful way.
There's only one source here that actually has Paul Carson as its subject, but nothing stated in the article is "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to have a lot more than just one hit of in-depth coverage about him.
As I don't have access to any database in which I could retrieve archived British media coverage from the 1960s, I'm willing to withdraw this if somebody who does have access to such resources can find enough coverage to improve it — but the sourcing here right now isn't good enough. Bearcat (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, United Kingdom, and Texas. Bearcat (talk) 14:03, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This article is way too much built on primary sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:16, 23 May 2022 (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.