![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 19 July 2010 (UTC). The result of the discussion was no consensus. |
![]() | Disambiguation | |||
|
I realise that it is not invariably wrong to have red links in articles, but there are limits. As I understand it it is OK to have a red link if this is likely to lead to an article eventually. However, going by his IMDB entry, this actor only ever had around a dozen parts, probably most of them minor, and none of them in an important film. I think that if a biography was ever written he would be judged not notable. At the very least, it is the responsibility of those who might disagree to establish notability. We can't have human name disambiguation pages cluttered with red links to non-notable actors and the like, there could be hundreds of them. PatGallacher (talk) 10:07, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
This may raise some questions which merit discussion across Wikipedia, but I do not think it is appropriate to list a non-notable actor in this way, including a blue link to a film he appeared in. PatGallacher (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Is it legitimate for a page like this to include an entry for a non-notable actor, if he happened to have a minor part in at least one notable film? Or is this approach likely to lead to human name disambiguation pages being cluttered with a lot of unencyclopedic entries? (We may take it that this actor is non-notable since nobody has taken up my suggestion that they could create a biography and defend its notability.) PatGallacher (talk) 18:31, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
It meets MOS:DABMENTION, so is, as the guidelines stand, valid. I think the guidelines are right, and it helps find what information we have on notable or semi-notable people. As it meets the guidelines at present, I don't think it should be removed from here, and a discussion could be started on the wikiproject if you feel MOS:DABMENTION should be altered. Boleyn (talk) 19:35, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
Whoops. Just stumbled on this incredibly trivial content dispute. One reason to list the guy on a dab page is that there are redlinks to him from other pages. Or at least there would be if someone didn't keep unlinking them. Plus there is the character by the same name on Blackadder. 64.105.65.28 (talk) 20:04, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
I appreciate that there could be a good deal of controversy about whether the portrayal of Haig on Blackadder is fair or accurate. However that does not justify treating him as a completely separate character. It could be a large can of worms, with every portrayal of a historical character in historical fiction or drama which has a brief paragraph in an article, to include this in a disambiguation page. Think about the implications of this for e.g. Henry VIII or Lady Jane Grey. PatGallacher (talk) 00:01, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
I suggest you give yourself a Wikipedia identity. We have a "Haig in popular culture" section in his biography. PatGallacher (talk) 11:25, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
Just to clarify. A lot of the time I am prepared to help anon users or newbies by adding material, but I feel I have to take some responsibility for the material I add. I don't feel able to add contentious material whose notability is likely to be challenged. PatGallacher (talk) 16:35, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
OK, I accept the notability of the actor has now been established. PatGallacher (talk) 17:44, 1 September 2010 (UTC)