Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Knox

Rob Knox

British actor with only one role, a minor part in a major movie, who was recently killed. WP:NOTMEMORIAL. As far as I can tell, the article was created after his death, with no real evidence of notability before his death. My {{PROD}} was deleted by an anon without comment. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:21, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete As he Just Died, Wikipedia is WP:NOTMEMORIAL. Plus he only has one role so hes not really popular. Also i read the article and someone copyvio the article with a section from the article. As per Note, I like this Article Deleted.--Pookeo9 (talk) 19:24, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete I agree with all above. I notice many seem to think that dying is grounds to be suddenly famous when it is indeed something EVERYONE does at some point. The story is tragic and the bravery of the young man commendable, but still not enough to warrant an article. OneHappyHusky (talk) 19:40, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete. I'm sorry that he's passed away, but we've been inundated lately with articles about glorified extras who are being presented as actors. These people are not notable per WP:ENTERTAINER. Qworty (talk) 19:42, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Meets verifiability standards for having been mentioned in multiple news sources, and is not a WP:BIO1E event because of his acting career. He's in the next Harry Potter film, for fuck's sake. This is not just an ordinary murder. A short but more than rudimentary article could be written using the existing sources without original research, so I see no real reason why this should be deleted. Also, this doesn't meet any of the speedy criteria as importance through being an actor wouldn't make it an A7.--81.151.167.179 (talk) 19:43, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't nominate it for speedy, as the fact that his role is not major is not immediately obvious. But we don't even have an article for the character in Wikipedia; it's a pointer to a subsection on a group formed by a minor Hogwarts teacher. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:51, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

On the other hand, we don't know he's in the film. It's still in post-production, and he could be cut. — Arthur Rubin (talk) 19:52, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
He's in the film, just see Imdb.com about the movie --80.203.70.235 (talk) 20:06, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: An actor with only one bit part under his belt (in an as-yet unreleased film) is simply not notable. His death, while tragic, is equally not of sufficient note to warrant a page, and is only receiving this level of coverage because of the very minor link to the Potter franchise. As stated by others, WP:NOTMEMORIAL and WP:ENTERTAINER have to be applied here. --Tailkinker (talk) 19:54, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. He is in numerous news sources, and is playing in the latest Harry Potter film. A speedy deletion only sounds like misuse of power to me. --80.203.70.235 (talk) 19:55, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]