Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Knowles(Actor)

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. MBisanz ^talk 21:44, 25 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Matthew Knowles(Actor)

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

I almost speedied this as G4, however the article does have a few more roles that weren't there previously and there is an article that wasn't existent at the January 2015 AfD. It's enough to where this might potentially knock it out of G4 contention. If anyone wants to just speedy it I won't mind, but I figure this would ensure that it couldn't be overturned at DRV.

However that said, there's not really anything to otherwise suggest that Knowles would now pass notability guidelines. Especially curious is the claim that he hosted the 2015 Oscars in China, given that the Oscars have always been held in the United States and always in Hollywood. China has the Golden Rooster Awards and Hundred Flowers Awards, but they're unrelated to the Oscars and if he did host them there would likely be some sort of record somewhere and you'd think that the news article I listed above would have it mentioned somewhere. Hosting a major ceremony of that nature would be a pretty big deal and would get a mention somewhere. That leads me to believe that the Oscar claim is pretty much a hoax. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:44, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

About hosting the 2015 Oscars in China, he hosted the live oscar broadcast from hollywood to China for Youku. Here is a link to part of the broadcast: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-0OuJHieDQ

This is the interview with Mingna, Agent May from Marvel Agents of SHIELD. Godwinme (talk) 21:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case then that's a huge, huge difference from how the article was phrased, as it gave off the impression that he was an official host. The difference between being an official host and covering the show for a website or channel is like the difference between playing football for a small local team and playing for Manchester United. However even though that's been cleared up, the problem of coverage still exists. Hosting a show in and of itself would not give Knowles notability, although it does make it more likely that someone will be covered in independent and reliable sources. Since he's pretty much a complete unknown in the English speaking world it's most likely that any coverage would be in Chinese, given the way the article is phrased. You can use foreign language coverage to establish notability, as long as it's in a place Wikipedia would consider independent and reliable and so long as it can be verified. Now something else to take into consideration is that being the first to do something doesn't automatically give notability either, as being first is only notable if various RS have written about it. In other words, Knowles being the first Caucasian to attend the BFA only holds water on Wikipedia if people are writing about it. Now if these sources can be found the article will still need to be re-written since you've inserted a lot of extremely promotional prose. Words like "prestigious" are typically used by people looking to promote the topic and are seen as WP:PEACOCK WP:BUZZWORDS. There are a ton of issues with the article, but one of the first things you need to do is search for and provide foreign language coverage. If this doesn't exist then he won't pass NACTOR on this round either, not unless you can establish notability for the shows and films he's been in (ie, write articles for those productions that establish notability) and show that his roles in them have been major. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:45, 16 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as I have encountered this article before and there's still consensus for deletion regarding the current questionability and there certainly is nothing else better to suggest it's acceptable now. SwisterTwister talk 00:46, 23 June 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.