Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Wren

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. Yunshui ^雲_水 09:40, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Doug Wren

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

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

Doug Wren (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)

Article is sourced to IMDB and nothing else. A BEFORE search was largely fruitless due to how common the name is, however, there is no indication of notability in the article. Playing a lead in only one film does not meet the inherent notability required of WP:NACTOR which requires a leading role in two or more productions. Chetsford (talk) 05:19, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 08:49, 20 June 2018 (UTC)

• Keep --- Although he is essentially a journeyman actor, I believe that he deserves a mention on this site. If other blips on the radar can get stubs, why not this guy? Although I will agree, better sources are required for this article to be more credible. --- Ducktech89 ^(talk)

• Actually I take it back. Upon closer inspection, this article is lacking in references, notability and anything that would make it notable. I change my mind, this article is poorly constructed and should be deleted. --- Ducktech89 ^(talk)

• Strong delete The backbone of Wikipedia is verifiability, and this article lacks even one reliable source. Next, the fact that horrid articles on totally non-notable people exist does not mean we need to keep any such case. People are not notable just because they had a credited role in a commericial distributed film, and that is the only threshold that would ever make Wren notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:54, 21 June 2018 (UTC)
• Delete - Clearly not notable. Beyond My Ken (talk) 23:26, 23 June 2018 (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.