Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goran D. Kleut

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. Only keep support is from confirmed sock puppets.Rlendog (talk) 18:59, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Goran D. Kleut

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} oder {{subst:csp|username}}.

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

Recently created stub article about a subject who fails WP:NACTOR. The only references in the article are to his empty profile page at SBS and the homepage for Sea Patrol (TV series). The actor's role in Sea Patrol was minimal (one episode) and the page does not mention him. The external link to IMDB is invalid, however he seems to have a page at http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2377520. The article creator has recently aded his name to the infobox of Gabriel (film),[1] but the movie poster doesn't mention him,[2] so his significance in the film is questionable. He is listed in The Tunnel (2011 film), another low budget (A$135k) film, and while "two" is technically "multiple", the actor's roles to date don't seem to meet the spirit of WP:NACTOR AussieLegend (talk) 00:59, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, but with chookas for future notability. The SBS ref confirms he was in those two films (and their notability may also be in question}. Not even a passing mention in any of the Sydney newspapers: see, for example a search in the SMH. --Shirt58 (talk) 10:09, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:26, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — -- Cirt (talk) 20:13, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This actor is clearly a working actor in australia and not adding him to wiki seems a shame as the industry is so small. The tunnel 2011 is creating history with its clever way of funding its self. Check it out at @ WWW.thetunnelmovie.net/ Turbine01 (talk) 08:21, 10 June 2011 (UTC)turbines01 — Turbine01 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Keep we should showcase more up and comming australian actors on wiki. This actor is working hard in an industry with little work here in australia. His agent site <rmk.com.au/goran_d_kleut/> shows he has played mad MLADENICH in a tv series for foxtel's Crime & Investigations network, Considering the success with the underbelly shows Smurfhouse89 (talk) 08:45, 10 June 2011 (UTC) smurfhouse89 — Smurfhouse89 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
Weak delete. Being in something notable doesn't automatically make notable and I can't find ref to support that the shows/series notability is because of or strongly influenced by his participation. Some day perhaps, but "a fish in a small pond" doesn't make the fish or the pond notable, and WP is not a promotional/talent showcase. DMacks (talk) 08:50, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This actor's role in the tunnel is deliberately not on the poster as he is the villain. If you get the DVD there are multiple comments from his fellow actors regarding his input to it. — Squeeker13 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 12:53, 10 June 2011 (UTC) (UTC).[reply]
Keep. I clicked on his IMDB profile and his body of work seems to have a certain versatility to it. His character in "Gabriel", Moloch seems a breakout villain and the first fight scene is very good for a lower budget film. In fact his fight scene in the Sea Patrol episode is also quite special and incorporated some wrestling transitions from hold to hold I haven't seen before in either real wrestling or the entertainment wrestling available — Nance1309 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 02:15, 11 June 2011 (UTC) (UTC).[reply]
Comment There seems to be an unusually high number of keep votes from newly registered accounts whose first and only edits have been at this AfD. Two of the first three signed their votes in a similar manner. All of the first three were registered in a 21 minute period last night. I've tagged them with {{SPA}} and added {{Not a ballot}} to the page because there seems to be some meat- or even sock-puppetry going on. None of those who have voted so far have addressed policy. --AussieLegend (talk) 08:34, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Kommentar. I've already cast my vote but as I'm admittedly new at this I don't believe I addressed the policy for notability correctly. My bad. As this is a discussion and not a majority rule I would point to his stage work but more with a question than an assertion. I recognise a number of those plays and playwrights as well as one or two of the directors. How would one ascertain whether these inclusions are sufficient for notability? --nance1309 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 00:38, 12 June 2011 (UTC).[reply]
- WP:NACTOR is our guide for assessing notability in this case and the subject clearly fails to meet the requirements. --AussieLegend (talk) 02:25, 12 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Keeping with the WP:NACTOR the movie The Tunnel was just reviewed in the sunday telegraph sunday 12th june 2011. Goran is the Villian in this movie, that is a significant role. He was also Moloch who is one of the fallen angels in Gabriel. Also was Lampay Fay in Star wars episode III revenge of the sith who's character has its own action figure. PLus the various well known stage productions he has been in. I think you you find that fits with the "Has had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions".Terribear69 (talk) 08:22, 13 June 2011 (UTC)terribear69[reply]
- Notability isn't inherited. Even if the movies in which he's appeared are notable, this doesn't mean that he is. He needs to be notable in his own right and it doesn't appear that he is. Similarly, while Lampay Fay might be notable, this doesn't make the actor notable. In fact, Kleut was so non-notable he wasn't even credited in the movie. NACTOR requires "significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions" and that really isn't the case with this person. He's had a couple of roles in productions of questionable notability. --AussieLegend (talk) 11:20, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Sock puppet investigation opened. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:16, 13 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notes for closing admin CheckUser has confirmed that Turbine01, Smurfhouse89, Squeeker13, Nance1309 and Terribear69 are all the same editor.[3] --AussieLegend (talk) 13:57, 15 June 2011 (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.