387:], these can't be created by the public, "the guild" has also been given this honor, but notable webseries like "legend of neil" and "riese the series" don't have them. It allows The guild and Spellfury to come up in the listings of traditional television shows, Youtube has deemed Spellfury notable because of the strong viewership of the series and fanbase. Remember we're discussing whether or not Spellfury is a notable "webseries", not a tv show.
567:, appears to be respected within their industry as having reliable articles and reviews, interspersed within gossip and annonymous reports. If a specific review or article in question has a byline, it can be presumed that it went through editorial oversight. If such do not have a byline or editorial acknowledement, then one can presume that particular article as unreliable. Each proffered item must be looked at on a case-by-case basis.
574:
articles as a means to encourage comments from readers as a kind of instant feedback. The newcomer to this pack, they appear to be already well respected within their industry. So... an authored
Tubefilter article or review can be considered generaly reliable, but the reader's comments in response are not.
621:
Indeed. My research ito the sources being used might allow a few of them to be considered in some way... perhaps for articles on projects where this actor might then be mentioned as part of cast, but in agreement, there is no significant coverage of the subject himself, even though there may be some
573:
is one of those cases of a reliable "blog"... in actuality a site with staff, editorial oversight, and a reputation for accuracy within their industry... not actually being a blog in its strictest sense, but using that self-proclaimed user-friendly label when publishing their researched and authored
494:
because the webseries
Spellfury is notable and the newspaper article says "Gordon met some of the key people involved in the production of Spellfury today. Those key individuals include the star of the show, actress Julie O'Halloran, who plays the role of "half-elf" Druinia, and Robbie Drebitt, who
380:
aren't reliable sources? I would say a webseries actor that has 884,042 (Spellfury views plus S.E.X. views) views of shows he's been in, one he was the lead actor in, the second a huge supporting character (lead villian) has a large fan base, their youtube channel has 15,000 friends and over 6,000
350:
Old school
Newspaper? (that are all going out of business by the way) They don't even know what a webseries is, they wouldn't even cover the most notable of weberies'. If you look through "the Guild's" early wiki history, they were declared notable with an IMDB link and a website. We are talking
301:
actor, comparing Robbie to a hollywood celebrity like ..John
Travolta is comparing apples to oranges. Adding up the amount of views he's received in both the webseries S.E.X. (Star Explorer Xenolith) and Spellfury equals 884,042. That's quite impressive (and notable) for a new medium like the
331:
to prove it. Likewise with establishing notability, here and on other article up for deletion, you have to show significant coverage in multiple reliable sources, e.g. a newspaper (preferably at least one national) articles about Robbie
Drebitt, Spellfury and so on.
163:
217:
607:. This is made obvious by the article itself which in the main is not even about the subject of the article but the series they are associated with. Notability is not inherited.
157:
118:
561:. It appears to have both the editorial oversight and the reputation for accuracy that should allow it to be seen as a reliable source for technology subjects.
123:
474:
Came very, very close to deleting this, but in the interest of reaching the right result, the new sources ought to be evaluated by someone.
393:
Added an article that was in the EMC Perth
Newspaper about Spellfury and Robbie Drebitt. For additional notablility as a webseries actor.
400:
577:
This said, and while any article needs to be looked at for specific suitability, being from one of these sites is not the deathknell.
91:
86:
95:
521:
667:
517:
78:
17:
178:
145:
550:
242:
651:
631:
586:
265:
36:
139:
650:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
404:
634:
616:
589:
504:
483:
468:
442:
417:
360:
341:
318:
289:
268:
232:
206:
135:
60:
513:
500:
82:
185:
624:
579:
479:
464:
396:
258:
509:
496:
74:
66:
612:
564:
438:
413:
373:
356:
314:
285:
171:
194:
Non notable actor. No evidence of the coverage by independent reliable sources required to meet
228:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
536:
for relisting and allowing my bit of rsesearch into some of the sources offered by
Showzampa.
668:
http://www.emcperth.ca/20100624/Entertainment/Perth-based+online+show+casts+spell+on+viewers
546:
451:
337:
202:
151:
533:
475:
460:
608:
434:
409:
352:
310:
281:
351:
about a "webseries" actor and
Spellfury is a "webseries", not a traditional tv show.
277:
253:
249:
195:
53:
49:
604:
600:
558:
328:
224:
112:
302:
webseries. Even looking at
MichealQShmidt's mention of WP:ENT, in there it says "
333:
198:
570:
542:
377:
57:
369:
554:
246:
454:
to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
327:
Claiming that he has a fanbase is not enough, you need to provide
644:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
218:
list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions
385:
Youtube has given
Spellfury it's own special showpage at
108:
104:
100:
170:
495:plays evil sorcerer Kruskull." + the wired article
459:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
654:). No further edits should be made to this page.
306:" which I believe Robbie does from the numbers.
433:about Spellfury and Rob to show notability.
184:
8:
212:
245:. This actor's nearly non-existant career
599:no significant coverage in independent,
381:subscribers, are you not counting them?
216:: This debate has been included in the
660:
7:
425:To satisfy wiki editors that want
24:
297:I changed "actor" on his page to
429:added better link to full page
427:old school newspaper references
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
1:
553:, with international editons
605:general notability criteria
407:) 00:47, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
252:and lack of coverage fails
686:
635:17:09, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
617:14:04, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
590:00:42, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
505:16:46, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
484:03:42, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
469:03:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)
443:16:02, 24 June 2010 (UTC)
418:14:20, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
361:13:48, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
342:20:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
319:20:08, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
290:20:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
269:05:00, 20 June 2010 (UTC)
233:16:19, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
207:15:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)
647:Please do not modify it.
61:05:46, 4 July 2010 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
551:Condé Nast Publications
368:Nuttah are you saying
622:toward his projects.
522:few or no other edits
524:outside this topic.
304:Has a large fan base
603:as required by the
565:Ain't It Cool News
374:Ain't It Cool News
243:TOO SOON (if ever)
44:The result was
545:) is a branch of
525:
471:
431:newspaper article
399:comment added by
235:
221:
677:
670:
665:
649:
627:
601:reliable sources
582:
547:Wired (magazine)
507:
458:
456:
408:
329:reliable sources
261:
256:. Sorry Robbie.
222:
189:
188:
174:
126:
116:
98:
34:
685:
684:
680:
679:
678:
676:
675:
674:
673:
666:
662:
658:
652:deletion review
645:
625:
580:
534:User:Courcelles
449:
394:
259:
131:
122:
89:
73:
70:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
683:
681:
672:
671:
659:
657:
656:
640:
639:
638:
637:
593:
592:
575:
568:
562:
538:
537:
489:
488:
487:
486:
457:
446:
345:
344:
308:
307:
292:
271:
236:
192:
191:
128:
124:AfD statistics
75:Robbie Drebitt
69:
67:Robbie Drebitt
64:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
682:
669:
664:
661:
655:
653:
648:
642:
641:
636:
633:
632:
629:
628:
620:
619:
618:
614:
610:
606:
602:
598:
595:
594:
591:
588:
587:
584:
583:
576:
572:
569:
566:
563:
560:
556:
552:
549:... owned by
548:
544:
541:Wired.com's (
540:
539:
535:
531:
528:
527:
526:
523:
519:
515:
511:
506:
502:
498:
493:
485:
481:
477:
473:
472:
470:
466:
462:
455:
453:
448:
447:
445:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
420:
419:
415:
411:
406:
402:
401:76.64.158.101
398:
392:
388:
386:
384:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
362:
358:
354:
349:
343:
339:
335:
330:
326:
323:
322:
321:
320:
316:
312:
305:
300:
296:
293:
291:
287:
283:
279:
275:
272:
270:
267:
266:
263:
262:
255:
251:
247:
244:
240:
237:
234:
230:
226:
219:
215:
211:
210:
209:
208:
204:
200:
197:
187:
183:
180:
177:
173:
169:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
137:
134:
133:Find sources:
129:
125:
120:
114:
110:
106:
102:
97:
93:
88:
84:
80:
76:
72:
71:
68:
65:
63:
62:
59:
55:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
663:
646:
643:
630:
623:
596:
585:
578:
559:Wired Italia
529:
491:
490:
450:
430:
426:
422:
421:
390:
389:
382:
365:
364:
347:
346:
324:
309:
303:
298:
295:Don't Delete
294:
273:
264:
257:
238:
213:
193:
181:
175:
167:
160:
154:
148:
142:
132:
45:
43:
31:
28:
520:) has made
395:—Preceding
158:free images
571:Tubefilter
543:Wired News
476:Courcelles
461:Courcelles
378:tubefilter
609:Guest9999
532:Kudos to
510:Toronto23
497:Toronto23
435:Showzampa
410:Showzampa
383:Important
370:wired.com
353:Showzampa
311:Showzampa
299:webseries
282:Joe Chill
225:• Gene93k
626:Schmidt,
581:Schmidt,
555:Wired UK
530:Comments
518:contribs
452:Relisted
397:unsigned
276:: Fails
260:Schmidt,
119:View log
48:. Fails
423:Comment
391:Comment
366:Comment
348:Comment
325:Comment
164:WP refs
152:scholar
92:protect
87:history
597:Delete
334:Nuttah
278:WP:ENT
274:Delete
254:WP:GNG
250:WP:ENT
248:fails
239:Delete
199:Nuttah
196:WP:GNG
136:Google
96:delete
58:Jayjg
54:WP:GNG
50:WP:ENT
46:delete
179:JSTOR
140:books
113:views
105:watch
101:links
16:<
613:talk
557:and
514:talk
501:talk
492:Keep
480:talk
465:talk
439:talk
414:talk
405:talk
376:and
357:talk
338:talk
315:talk
286:talk
229:talk
214:Note
203:talk
172:FENS
146:news
109:logs
83:talk
79:edit
52:and
241:as
223:--
186:TWL
121:•
117:– (
615:)
516:•
508:—
503:)
482:)
467:)
441:)
416:)
372:,
359:)
340:)
317:)
288:)
280:.
231:)
220:.
205:)
166:)
111:|
107:|
103:|
99:|
94:|
90:|
85:|
81:|
56:.
611:(
512:(
499:(
478:(
463:(
437:(
412:(
403:(
355:(
336:(
313:(
284:(
227:(
201:(
190:)
182:·
176:·
168:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
143:·
138:(
130:(
127:)
115:)
77:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.