Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Bignell

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. czar 02:10, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Bignell

[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)

Literally multiple citations of one page from a website that the subject's own agent felt was only worth getting trial hosting for. I don't see any independent sources but... Look, the subject's own agent used a web designer's trial page for hosting and called it a day, I'm too sober to imagine a clearer sign of lack of notability. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:38, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:49, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. 1234qwer1234qwer4 (talk) 13:25, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure - definitely one of the main characters in Coming of Age, appearing from the pilot to the end, and had a regular on off part in the Bill, but other than that a jobbing actor. Cant find much in the news as there is a Tony Bignell, a VP at Nike who seems to dominate.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 13:48, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely no reason to be deleted, it just needs someone to make it protected to stop the spam and cyber bullying as we’ve all seen how these things can end! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.23.9.52 (talk) 18:02, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing. --Cewbot (talk) 00:02, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Logs: 2008-11 ↻ restored, 2008-11 ✗ deleted, 2008-11 ↻ restored, 2008-11 ✗ A7, 2008-11 ↻ restored, 2008-11 ✗ A7, 2008-10 ✗ R3, 2008-10 ✗ R3

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:50, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Fairly minor roles so far and insufficiently sourced. scope_creep^Talk 07:34, 3 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 13:14, 10 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article has 22 footnotes which appear at first glance appear to be 22 different sources, but all of them are the exact same page being cited for 22 credits this actor has had. And that page is, as the nom says, a temporary web hosting page, rather than a reliable source. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:46, 10 July 2020 (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.