Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthony Sullivan (pitchman)

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. The arguments on both sides could definitely be fleshed out, but the consensus is to keep at this time. Mojo Hand (talk) 13:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Anthony Sullivan (pitchman)

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Rathfelder (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete a non-notable person in advertising.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:00, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It could be included but the article needs work the MONTKUSH section reads like it's from his website.

Keep I would argue that Mr. Sullivan meets all three criteria at WP:ENT. For #1, he was a main co-star of PitchMen, among many other minor roles in other productions. For #2, this is maybe weak evidence but he has nearly 40,000 Facebook fans on his official page. For #3, he has been a prolific creator of these pitch infomercials, and along with Billy Mays made a unique mark on the industry with their passionate style (which appears to be how Pitchmen came about in the first place). Agreed, though, that the article needs work and particularly the MONTKUSH section does seem ad-like. Paradox society 07:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sulfurboy (talk) 19:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep, a search of google news reveals some articles from reliable sources that could expand the article. → Lil-℧niquԐ1 - (Talk) - 22:13, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per those above. Needs improvement but clearly notable. Squeeps10 ^{Talk to me}_{My edits} 20:11, 9 May 2020 (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.