Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Webb (anti-censorship campaigner)

David Webb (anti-censorship campaigner)

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

Contested PROD. Reason was "Does not pass WP:BIO and the references do not assist" Fiddle Faddle 17:44, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestion that this article be deleted is absurd; it easily meets all the relevant criteria. I suggest the person who proposed its deletion does his homework.

A Baron — Preceding unsigned comment added by VennerRoad (talk • contribs) 18:14, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Tutelary (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Tutelary (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Don't censor. WP:NOT censored. There are a few internet-based references (not included in the article), and it isn't a BLP. Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Article ultimately fails WP:GNG in its present state, and the research for reliable sources did not seem promising. Tutelary (talk) 18:51, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Nothing strongly suggests a lack of notability. There seems to be a substantial archive of materials at http://www.infotextmanuscripts.org/ncropa/ncropa_site_index.html - I'm not saying these could be usable on Wikipedia - but their quantity does suggest the organisation had some notability and influence at the time it was active, which should make us cautious about deleting. This was all pre-internet, so a lack of online references is not an important indication of lack of notability. There is no Wikipedia article on the organisation National Campaign for the Reform of the Obscene Publications Acts so maybe an alternative is to rename the article to that title and expand it. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 19:34, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not set in my viewpoint to delete, so if you can come up with sources--even offline ones to verify notability, I'll change my !vote. Tutelary (talk) 19:38, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

He has an imdb entry http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0916079/ with 82 credits to his name. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 20:49, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Imdb isn't a reliable source for BLPs and cannot be used to demonstrate notability, but it gives me a starting point to look over and attempt to find reliable sources denoting the movies and shows he's been in. Tutelary (talk) 21:21, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Was involved in an anti-censorship campaign and, according to unreferenced and not necessarily reliable sources, appeared in a number of minor roles that do not meet the criteria of WP:NACTOR.--Rpclod (talk) 21:48, 3 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

David Webb founded NCROPA, not was involved with. The NCROPA papers are held by Warwick University: http://dscalm.warwick.ac.uk/DServe/dserve.exe?dsqIni=DServeadv.ini&dsqApp=Archive&dsqCmd=Show.tcl&dsqDb=Catalog&dsqPos=0&dsqSearch=((text)%3D%27ncropa%27)

As for "minor" acting rolls, his touring credits include "The Odd Couple" and "The Water Gipsies".