Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gus Sorola

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 keep. causa sui (talk) 03:09, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Gus Sorola

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

Not notable, no third party sources. Prod declined. Hairhorn (talk) 15:34, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Sorola was a voice actor in Red vs. Blue and The Strangerhood. I think there could be a case to be made for all three guideliens in WP:NACTOR if appropriate sources exit. I agree references are a significant problem and I could not turn up much else via Google. However, I do not know enough about this area to have an opinion. I've made a note about this AfD on Talk:Red vs. Blue and perhaps someone more familiar with Sorola's body of work can provide some guidance. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 15:56, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't even buy "appeared in popular web videos and podcasts" as a claim to notability, but I'm sure there are others who disagree. Hairhorn (talk) 16:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert on Red vs. Blue, but I do know it is a video series in its 9th season, some of its content was included with the release of Halo 3, DVDs of the seasons are sold at Game Stop, and they had a film in the Sundance Film Festival. It's not a traditional TV series to be sure, but to categorize Red vs. Blue as simply a "popular web video" doesn't seem objectively accurate to me. In my opinion, a notability claim here has a lot to do with this voice actor's prominence and role in the series, a question which I am not qualified to answer. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 16:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. If he's notable, the coverage will be there. I see a lot of mentions, but little else. Hairhorn (talk) 16:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I very much agree. As I mentioned earlier, I did some work trying to uncover additional coverage of him and I could not find anything significant. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 16:20, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep 1, 2, 3. Penny Arcade is one the largest online comic distributors in the world. This article easily meets the minimum threshold for notability. Wikifan^{Be nice} 23:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how that makes this individual notable. And blogs are not considered reliable third party sources. Hairhorn (talk) 02:26, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blogs are tradionally seen as unreliable sources but in this case these sources provide sufficient notability in spite of their "blog" status. Many reliable sources such as CNN and The Guardian publish blog-like articles and yet their reliability is not questioned. This article easily meets the bare minimum threshold for notability. He is one of the chief founders of Rooster Teeth and continues to act, write, and participate in its on-going business ventures. Wikifan^{Be nice} 08:10, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the refs and the point about Penny Arcade only establish notability for Rooster Teeth, as far as I can tell. I don't see the individual notability. The fact that a reliable paper might have an attached blog does not magically make blogs a reliable source.Hairhorn (talk) 13:31, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The sources explicitly refer to Sorola, not simply Rooster Teeth. IMO the threshold for notability has been proven. Wikifan^{Be nice} 16:12, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the issue is coverage in reliable, third party sources, which appear to be absent; thus the AFD nomination. Hairhorn (talk) 16:18, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The issue is verifiability. Gus Sorola is a notable figure and founder of Rooster Teeth, a leading machinima company. I've provided several sources that you dubiously dismissed as "blogs" though some were clearly not as defined by wikipedia policy. Wikifan^{Be nice} 20:24, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

? The primary issue, as it says in the nomination, is notability, which the references you suggest don't seem to establish. Being attached to a successful company is not a good claim to individual notability. Hairhorn (talk) 01:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The references more than suggest notability, they confirm it. And you have not argued against their notability, but reliability. Wikifan^{Be nice} 04:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 01:19, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to chime in here. I think it would be useful and constructive to ground any discussion of WP:N in specific guidelines (i.e. WP:NACTOR). As an example, I think Red vs. Blue speaks to guideline one of WP:NACTOR, as he voiced what looks like a notable character in a notable production. Sailing to Byzantium (talk) 05:13, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He has also acted in over 20 Rooster Teeth shorts that have received millions of views both on youtube and the official website. Not sure how relevant that is here though. Wikifan^{Be nice} 07:03, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 16:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Byzantium's arguments for WP:NACTOR. Red vs. Blue is a notable show (see this review by CHUD, this review by e-film critic, this review by Collider.com, this article from IGN about its upcoming season DVD release, this interview with the creators including Sorolla, plus mentions in the Boston Globe. Sorolla is a main character in the show, so this article is a sure keep. I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. — I, Jethrobot ^{drop me a line} (note: not a bot!) 17:28, 19 July 2011 (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.