Andrew Tite : Prod tag removed by IP who claims to know the subject so bringing here.  The references consist of two dead film websites listing the cast, and one local newspaper article about Tite's work as a mascot for $17/hour.  ThaddeusSholto ( talk ) 22:38, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete Doesn't come close to meeting notability requirements in the sources already used, and immediately clear from a search that there are no better sources to add.  Thebookstamper ( talk ) 15:46, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers and Canada .  Shellwood ( talk ) 22:53, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Theatre-related deletion discussions .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 00:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No evidence of passing of WP:NACTOR .  Hemiauchenia ( talk ) 23:10, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Fails both WP:NACTOR and WP:GNG .  AndyTheGrump ( talk ) 23:24, 19 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  No evidence of notabilty.  Xxanthippe ( talk ) 23:44, 19 January 2024 (UTC) .  [ reply ] Delete Not a notable actor.  I once dressed up in a Smokey Bear costume and that does not make me notable.  I am sorry that somebody got some terrible advice from a scammer , but that has no impact on this deletion debate.  Cullen328 ( talk ) 01:41, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per Cullen328.  L EPRICAVARK ( talk ) 02:01, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Fails general notability and acting notability .   The references are rubbish.  Reference Number Reference Comments Independent Significant Reliable Secondary 1 www.metronews.ca/toronto/comment/article/102706 Archived from Wayback - An interview about performing in a mascot costume Probably not Yes Probably No 2 web.archive.org/web/20080827203656/ http://cycleoffear.net/index_files/Page364.htm Wayback archive of a cast listing for a film from the playbill.   14th line in cast listing Yes No, neither for GNG nor for NACTOR Probably No 3 web.archive.org/web/20080117163502/ http://www.thesecharmingmen.ca/castcrew.html Unreadable Wayback archive of a cast listing for a film from the playbill Yes Probably not Unreadable ?  Robert McClenon ( talk ) 06:44, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The last source is unreadable, but looking at the source it's because they made the text black on a black background (and scrolling for some reason).  After making it readable, he appears to be mentioned in the cast table, playing as an extra.  Still not significant.  Chaotıċ Enby ( talk · contribs ) 08:11, 20 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete , since I realized I forgot to vote in my previous comment.  Chaotıċ Enby ( talk · contribs ) 15:49, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Does not pass WP:NACTOR and fails WP:GNG .  Tar nis hed Path talk 08:11, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom -- Devokewater | (tαlk) 11:51, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete No indication of notability.  Jeppiz ( talk ) 13:27, 21 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  To qualify for an article an actor must pass the test at WP:NACTOR , which requires significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows, stage performances, or other productions .  Most of the roles listed in the filmography are very minor parts, e.g. in "Charming Men" he played "Nerd Extra #1", and in "Zombie Jesus!" he was an extra in a congregation.  The movies where he had more significant roles do not appear to be notable, e.g. "Cycle of Fear: There Is No End" does not appear to have recieved any coverage in reliable sources or have been reviewed anywhere, "Light's Malevolence" is a short film I can find no coverage of in reliable sources (IMDB estimates the box office takings at $400).  The sources in the article consist of two cast lists and an interview with a local paper, which are insufficient to demonstrate a passing of WP:NBASIC .  86.23.109.101 ( talk ) 12:35, 23 January 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete