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.
No evidence this actor passes
WP:GNG or
WP:NACTOR. Adames is a
WP:BLP1E for his Razzie award. The article's earlier assertion (removed by me) that he is the youngest person to receive a Razzie is
WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH based on
WP:SYNTH (none of the sources actually state that he was the youngest). There's no other claim to fame or notability; inclusion in other sources is limited to
WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. There was a stable redirect to
Gloria (1980 film) until recently; I would be OK with restoring the redirect per consensus or outright deleting.
Dclemens1971 (
talk)
04:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Hi. Looking at the rules you were right to remove the “youngest winner” assertion… thanks for pointing that out. As for the article I figured winning a Razzie, especially one of the first ever, qualified as a “significant event”. Kind of like how we have many stub articles for everyone who ever competed at the Olympics. So that was why I made it at the time
JSwift4901:18, 10 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Here's my thinking: Under
WP:NBIO, "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor" is a criterion -- but the Razzies are really a tongue-in-cheek anti-honor. Most people who win them are already separately notable under
WP:GNG,
WP:NBIO, or
WP:NENTERTAINER, but for those who aren't independently notable I don't think being recognized for being bad at something should qualify as "a significant award or honor." And so all the news coverage for this guy then falls under
WP:BLP1E and should be covered at the movie's page, not as a standalone page.
Dclemens1971 (
talk)
02:23, 10 July 2024 (UTC)reply
Could being generally recognized for being bad be, as the criteria says, “interesting or unusual”, if not an honor :) If we had a source specifically confirming that Adams was the youngest recipient I would definitely advocate for the article to stay, as that’s an additional notability; the Razzies had a controversy recently for nominating children. But since we don’t have that source yet, I’m not too concerned either way.
JSwift4916:28, 10 July 2024 (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.