Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Umali

: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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:16, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

=[[Matthew Umali]]=

:{{la|Matthew Umali}} – (View AfDView log){{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/reports/afd/{{urlencode:Matthew Umali}}.html|2=Afd statistics}}

:({{Find sources|Matthew Umali}})

BLP referenced only to IMDB. I could find no independent coverage to verify the subject meets general notability criteria, and the lack of multiple significant roles means he does not meet WP:ENT at this time. Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 20:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 21:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- Jclemens-public (talk) 21:04, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

*Keep None of the Above. The decision to delete a Filipeno actor/singer smells bad when the subject page in question contains a beg for money message from Jimbo Wales. There is clearly way too much East Coast user/admin bias on these deletions. A television and radio broadcast is notible whether it be a long or short career. Actors and artistic performers should not be deleted by armchair critics who have no personal knowledge or have actually seen them perform. Rather than deletionism why not try to improve the content or reach out to the contributors by obtaining more information? PsychClone —Preceding undated comment added 22:02, 13 November 2010 (UTC). Trolling struck per ANI consensus. Favonian (talk) 21:33, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Delete. Fails general notability guidelines. Four tiny parts in shows, the last one nine years ago, and no independent coverage... Just not notable enough for an encyclopedia. QU ^TalkQu 22:13, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
Delete Not notable. JDDJS (talk) 04:43, 14 November 2010 (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.