Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flint Dille
Tools
Actions
General
Print/export
In other projects
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 02:51, 22 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Flint Dille (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Contested PROD (though contestor in no way addressed concerns). Fails WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:CREATIVE. Not a well-known or influential figure in television or the video game industry, despite claims. The only independent sources are some Transformers fan sites and an off-hand mention of a collaboration on a non-notable game project with Gary Gygax. No independent google hits outside of comprehensive databases like IMDB and MobyGames and a single book listed on Amazon, none of which confers notability. Writing for some low-budget movies and games does not confer notability. Kuguar03 (talk) 05:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - doesn't seem to pass WP:BIO. While he's been involved in plenty of notable franchises, he doesn't appear to be notable himself. Robofish (talk) 01:18, 14 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. (G·N·B·S·RS·Talk) • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:25, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per Robofish. Nothing states he is particularly of note for his work. --Teancum (talk) 15:19, 21 February 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.