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 no consensus.  Sandstein  15:11, 3 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Emanuel Bettencourt

[edit]
Emanuel Bettencourt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable actor (minor roles only) or martial artist Peter Rehse (talk) 14:13, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 14:14, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:55, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:56, 9 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:18, 10 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Walton (talk) 13:10, 17 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Martial art hall of fames have never been considered indication of notability and neither is a passing mention in a list defined by an adjective. They attended something and were called elite. Does not come close to meeting WP:MANOTE.Peter Rehse (talk) 10:25, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. As I said above, I'm not sure any one feature qualifies under any individual criteria of notability, but in my opinion the whole package (including martial arts, with RS mentions, and profile in notable TV and movies) seems likely notable. I stand by that assessment. AbstractIllusions (talk) 01:47, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 22:38, 26 December 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.