Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Kahan

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 no consensus. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:50, 9 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Steve Kahan

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

Delete: as insufficiently notable actor. Quis separabit? 02:57, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 23:14, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. GabeIglesia (talk) 23:15, 15 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as not compelling for any applicable notability including for WP:ENTERTAINER. SwisterTwister talk 04:14, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for prominent roles , about 4th to 6th billing in notable films such as Lethal Weapon 3,and 4,Conspiracy Theory and Assassins, passes WP:NACTOR Atlantic306 (talk) 18:51, 16 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That can be said for several actors but that is not going to actually imrpvoe the article which it needs, something that can also be said of several other actors articles. SwisterTwister talk 23:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:51, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - he has a featured recurring role in one of the highest rated film series of all time, appearing in all 4 films in the series. Add to that his featured roles in Conspiracy Theory, Assassins, Warlock: The Armageddon, and Inside Moves. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:52, 1 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Coffee // have a cup // beans // 06:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to suggest Keep for now if it means this can be closed for now, with an actual consensus. SwisterTwister talk 06:27, 9 May 2016 (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.