Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Haskell V. Anderson III

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. The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:57, 19 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Haskell V. Anderson III

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

Unreferenced because there are no reliable sources about him. He meets WP:BARE by having appeared in movies. Doesn't deserve his own Wiki page. LADY LOTUS • TALK 17:04, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 19:46, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep He meets WP:NACTOR through various roles in film and tv (from Brotherhood of Death and Kickboxer (film) to the play Julia which was widely reviewed in 2010-11). There's not much detailed content online, but his career goes back to the late 1970s, during which he's worked widely on film, TV, and stage, as well as being involved with the L.A. Rebellion movement, working for Catholic organisation CIMA, winning an NAACP acting award (not notable in itself but all part of the picture), so there may well be content on him offline. I removed some promotional language but it could do with further editing. As to whether he "deserves" an article, this is about applying policies not Lady Lotus's moral judgment. --Colapeninsula (talk) 11:37, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment When I say he doesn't "deserve", I meant he doesn't really have any reason to have his own wikipedia page per notability. And as per WP:NACTORS it states they should have "significant roles in multiple notable films" I would beg to differ. Most of his roles are College Interviewer, Male Juror, Man #3, Junkie, Courtroom #7 Clerk, Well Dressed Client, Man, or Barber shop pimp to name a few. He played a minor role in Kickboxer (film), I don't know if I would consider that notable. He's more of an extra/character actor at best. LADY LOTUS • TALK 12:19, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 12:42, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as a reasonably recognizable character actor, with sufficient parts to pass NACTOR. Bearian (talk) 18:10, 18 February 2014 (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.