Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Calvin Jung

: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. Courcelles 00:31, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

=[[Calvin Jung]]=

:{{la|Calvin Jung}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Calvin_Jung Stats])

:({{Find sources|Calvin Jung}})

Very minor actor, does not satisfy WP:NACTOR or WP:N. Not even close, really. GrapedApe (talk) 04:20, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment. He has been working for a long time and GBooks and GNews turn up a lot of hits. Most are bare mentions in cast lists but some have more substance. I haven't had time to go through the many pages of the results, but examples include [http://books.google.com/books?id=q0RaiTE-QusC&lpg=PA45&dq=%22Calvin%20Jung%22&pg=PA45#v=onepage&q=%22Calvin%20Jung%22&f=false][http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=0_crAAAAIBAJ&sjid=GG0FAAAAIBAJ&dq=calvin-jung&pg=2215%2C6407710][http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F30C11FE3D551B7493C5A91783D85F448785F9][http://thestar.com.my/lifestyle/story.asp?file=/2006/2/12/lifeliving/13244725&sec=lifeliving][http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-22881191.html][http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-84002753.html]. Might be worth more detailed investigation. --Arxiloxos (talk) 08:22, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep. I think he does satisfy WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG. Article should could be improved, IMO. 173.13.150.22 (talk) 01:31, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:25, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

::Please enlighten us as to this actor's "significant roles in multiple notable" works, "large fan base or significant "cult" following" or "unique, prolific or innovative contributions".--GrapedApe (talk) 04:50, 6 January 2013 (UTC)

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

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Riley_Huntley/You_missed! Cheers,] Riley 00:32, 12 January 2013 (UTC)

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

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 03:19, 19 January 2013 (UTC)

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

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, AutomaticStrikeout (T • C) 02:21, 26 January 2013 (UTC)

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

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mediran (t • c) 04:06, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

  • We are clearly moving towards no consensus closure, just to note that I could not find sources proving his notability according to GNG, so weak delete.--Ymblanter (talk) 10:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete Unable to find reliable, secondary sources which evidence the notability of this actor under WP:GNG. --j⚛e deckertalk 16:15, 2 February 2013 (UTC)

: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.