Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adwin Brown

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 02:32, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adwin Brown

[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)

Still WP:TOOSOON, subject has had one major recurring role in television so far, in addition to several bit roles, falling short of WP:NACTOR. All coverage available in RS is routine casting announcements that do not provide sufficient coverage of the subject to meet WP:GNG. Their casting for future recurring roles indicates that they will likely meet notability guidelines in the future, but per WP:CRYSTAL that means we should wait until those roles have actually occurred and been shown to be significant. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:04, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I had been asked to review this article by an editor who I had previously interacted with. My review at that time suggested it was not notable for exactly the reasons Rosguill said as he fails both NACTOR and GNG. I also do not see any sort of redirect target as a reoccurring role does not seem like a strong enough target article. I left the article for another reviewer to make their own judgement because I didn't feel it was fair to nominate for deletion something someone had asked me in good faith to review. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 18:34, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We could redirect to Heathers (TV series), as that is their most notable role that has already occurred. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 18:38, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Some reoccurring roles are that way for contractual reasons and they might appear in 90% of episodes. Other such roles might be in 1 or 2 a season. I don't know how much his reoccurring role was for Heathers or will be for You, but in general I think we shouldn't be redirecting for such roles. Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 19:01, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re-reading the article, I'm inclined to agree. For some reason I had been under impression that Brown had a lead role. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 20:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 20:51, 2 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delete does not meet the multiple significant roles in notable productions threshold.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:50, 4 April 2019 (UTC)*[reply]
Possible Keep. Bit about him in The Decider, the pop culture website that's operated by the New York Post. See ‘You’ Season 2 Adds ‘Heathers’ Star Adwin Brown By Denise Petski. And Netflixlife.com says that folks would recognize his name from Heathers and Fosters. From what I can see, he already has some recognisable star status and his star is definitely on the rise. He has a 2, 4, 9 and 10 recurrence in his reoccurring roles. and they have been going up on the increase in the order I have given. If after some good discussion on this has been done and it appears that it's heading for a delete then I guess we can preserve the history and redirect. But at this time, I think the article could be kept. Karl Twist (talk) 10:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I've just had another look at the page. Not much of an article. If it is to stay then there's a lot of work to be done. Karl Twist (talk) 10:41, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Karl Twist Can you clarify if you are suggesting notability per WP:GNG, WP:NACTOR, or some other standard? Best, Barkeep49 (talk) 14:39, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delete fails WP:NACTOR, agree that this may be WP:TOOSOON and he may become notable in the future. - GretLomborg (talk) 18:36, 9 April 2019 (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.