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 keep. Consensus hasn't changed. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:22, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen_Moorer[edit]

Stephen_Moorer (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Subject doesn't seem noteworthy as per WP:NACTOR and WP:SIGCOV guidelines. Merging this topic with the Pacific Repertory Theatre page seems to be more ideal. I've read this previous deletion nomination's debate, but remain unconvinced. I look forward to the ensuing discussion. Kkbay (talk) 19:10, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 March 17. Snotbot  t • c »  20:05, 17 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:14, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JohnCD (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep "Issues" gone over repeatedly at AFD two years ago, during which it was expanded and far better sourced than when it received its first nomination two years ago... a nomination that resulted in a "keep". Sure, and while consensus can change, the article is now well sourced and shows this thespian as receiving the coverage required to both assert and show notability. The nominator here being unconvinced of the earlier AFD's close notwithstanding, I see this thespian as being worthy of note through a meeting of WP:ACTOR and WP:GNG. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 02:45, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Bmusician 06:08, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, asked and answered. Alessandra Napolitano (talk) 06:29, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - This closed as a keep previously, notability is not temporary, and there is nothing to indicate that community standards for the inclusion-worthiness or lack thereof for actors have changed over the last two years. Carrite (talk) 16:04, 31 March 2012 (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.