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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thomas Gardner (Director) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Non-notable director. A Google News Archive search returns no nontrivial coverage in reliable sources about the subject. Delete this unsourced BLP per Wikipedia:Verifiability, Wikipedia:Notability (people), and Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Cunard (talk) 00:49, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. —ManicSpider (talk) 03:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete So let's summarise - his 6 main claims to notability as a director are:

1) as an animator, he made a yet to be released series of shorts;

2) he and his friends put a movie of them mucking about out, but later thought better of it;

3) he tried to make a movie but couldn't finish it because of "bad weather";

4) he and his friends are thinking of making a full movie - maybe 2!;

5) one of his friends is a writer; and

6) when at home he made some videos of himself dancing.

Even if he could find independent, reliable sources for each of the above claims he still wouldn't pass WP:CREATIVE. Perhaps reconsider when he's done some directing. - ManicSpider (talk) 03:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry let me correct you there manicspider, you see when you wrote he and his friends are thinking of making a full movie - maybe 2!, i thought that angered me because they will be released in April and May. Just to let you know. - Greggy 2746. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggy2746 (talk • contribs) 16:55, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies if I've hurt your feelings. I get very frustrated seeing Wikipedia used by aspiring creatives as a platform to puff up their slender resumes, but that doesn't excuse my being un-WP:CIVIL. - ManicSpider (talk) 19:44, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a aspiring creative that puffs up their slender resumes and if you are going to insult me i will have none of it and report you for abuse - Greggy 2746. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greggy2746 (talk • contribs) 19:56, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Are you not, in fact, aspiring? Are you not, after all, attempting to create things? Do you have proven resumes as filmmakers recognized by the world? It doesn't seem as if ManicSpider was uncivil at all.  Ravenswing  14:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Please see also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fronts of War (2nd nomination) and The Dreamer (2011 Film) which I haven't got time tonight to nominate. If there were any real substance to this lot, there'd be references. If there are no references, after being told about the need for them at an AfD already, then the idea of notability flies straight out the window and doesn't stop to wave goodbye. I can see this being possibly a vanity trip for a bunch of youngsters, or a plug for some video they're planning to put on YouTube, or the first ventures of the youngest director to get to Hollywood in 2015. The third is possible. I might become Pope in 2015, having beaten Osama bib Laden in the election. Possible. Not likely, but possible. In the meantime, WP:CRYSTAL applies to the films, and WP:BLP to the biography. Good luck with the filming, but don't neglect your homework. Good GCSEs and GCEs are a surer way of getting a career, and won't do any harm if your ventures do take off. When/if they do, you'll get an article. Not until. Peridon (talk) 19:59, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:TOOSOON. Until such time, if ever, that the subject gets coverage for his films or win awards for them, he fails WP:BIO... and as not properly sourcable, the article fails WP:BLP. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:16, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Per nom.--Epeefleche (talk) 14:00, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete: Utter failure of WP:BIO, as above. It's regrettable if Greggy2746 feels hard done by with his reception here, but it's incumbent on newcomers to learn Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for articles, especially after some have already been deleted for failure to meet them.  Ravenswing  14:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non notable director, no references could have been speedy deleted.Teapotgeorge^Talk 21:58, 22 January 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.