Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Famiglietti
If those sources constitute in-depth coverage I'll eat my hat. World News Network is a news aggregator, not a producer of content. The page presented aggregates an interview by the subject (interviews are primary sources that don't back up notability claims; it's also an interview by the producer of the film he was making at that time which doubles down on it not being independent) as well as '''the Wikipedia article about Famiglietti'''. It is offensive to the intelligence of anyone reading this discussion that {{u|Dream Focus}} would try to pass that off as an in-depth reliable source. TVGuide is a listing of credits, not in-depth coverage. The CTPost interview linked by {{u|Lightburst}} is the exact same text as the Associated Press link that Dream Focus posted, so it's ''one'' source, and it's an interview, which again, gives little credibility to a claim of notability. Finally, Lightburst knows very well that simply writing a book doesn't make one notable, so it amazes me that that's being held up as an indicator of notability. What a load of rubbish. And oh, ''quelle surprise'' - it was posted at . &spades
— User:Premeditated, 20:48, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:ARS (Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron)