Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douglas Tait
I see three ways this actor could pass |notability via -- 1) ; 2) ; 3) or --but I do not think he quite does. '''1)''' For , I do not see anyone arguing he passes No. 3. I do not think he meets No. 1 because his most significant roles were minor characters in notable movies, stuntman parts playing major characters--but not being the actual actor credited with playing the part--in notable movies, and major roles in non-notable movies. I do not see that as the same as "significant roles in multiple notable films". For No. 2, I do not see any |reliable sources that say something like "Tait has a large fan base". Many fan sites or discussions of fan sites is not the same as a reliable source saying so, even if that would be enough to support a journalist to say so. '''2)''' For , I do not think anyone could argue for Nos. 2, 4, or 5. For No. 1, I do not know whether this applies at all to this sort of filmmaker. It does not look like he is well-known yet for his filmmaking or that others reference his work. For No. 3, I do not see his film being reviewed as this one requires to pass. '''3)''' For , he needs to have received coverage in "multiple published secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." Moreover, "trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability." I see a good deal of trivial coverage--not to say unimportant coverage, but lists of cast members, even in a |reliable source do not pass it in my opinion. I do see several Canyon News articles that undoubtedly have "the depth of coverage"  calls for to pass. In fact, I see one more than mentioned in the nomination.  They were both written by Tommy Garrett. I am not sure if this is the publicist Tommy Garrett described in http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3092388/bio this biography or http://www.readthehook.com/82090/news-garretts-plea-publicist-guilty-reduced-charge this news article, but http://www.canyon-news.com/artman2/publish/On_the_Industry_1168/True_Blood_s_Soul_Of_Fire_In_Hollywoodland.php this Canyon News piece makes it seem so. Even if not, I do not think we can consider the Canyon News pieces to be "intellectually independent of each other" because they were written by the same person. I also do not think we know whether the stories meet the independent sources criteria to help pass  as stated in , especially if one can write their own article and have it published (however true it may be) if they buy a certain number of advertisements. Also related to this criteria, I see many blog or fan articles and interviews that do not meet the "reliable" criteria of , not because I think they are lying or anything, but because they would not meet that criteria as described in . The Inkless Magazine article is a close call. Ultimately I do not is meets  either. Even commenters to the articles seem to refer to it as a blog. Its publisher describes it http://www.renderednetworks.com/?page_id=320 on this webpage, but I can't find much else to support it as a reliable source as described in . '''Conclusion''', because I do not think any of the  criteria are fully passed, I do not think this actor passes |notability, though it is a close case. This is not to say he will not in the future, but this may be a case of otJustYet
— User:Hoppingalong, 04:06, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:N||WP:BIO||WP:ENT||WP:CREATIVE||WP:BASIC||WP:ENT||WP:RS||WP:CREATIVE||WP:BASIC||WP:RS||WP:BASIC||WP:BASIC||WP:IS||WP:BASIC||WP:RS||WP:RS||WP:RS||WP:BASIC||WP:N||WP:N (Wikipedia:Notability)