Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christian Gion

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 06:03, 10 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Christian Gion

[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)

Unremarkable person, minimally sourced, WP:BEFORE turns up nothing substantial. —S Marshall T/C 20:40, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —S Marshall T/C 20:40, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The body of this article appears to have been poorly translated from the corresponding section of fr:Christian Gion, the French Wikipedia's article about this film director. And even in its original language, that section is tagged by the French Wikipedia with a message that says, "Cette section n’est pas rédigée dans un style encyclopédique" ("This section is not written in an encyclopedic style"). So if this article is to be kept, it could definitely use a rewrite. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:29, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep I have tried to fix the issue with the non-encyclopedic tone. Though struggled to get some good references about him. Only found some passing mention in this polanski petition. --☆★Mamushir (✉✉) 20:14, 15 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia requires reliable sources, especially for articles on living people. IMDb is not reliable, so if that is the only source we must delete.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:51, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 10:20, 20 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ‑Scottywong | [yak] || 22:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why does this keep getting relisted? Is it because of the one weak keep where the user admits they can't find sources?—S Marshall T/C 12:54, 2 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Because nobody has offered substantial analysis as to why they are or aren't notable. The comments are 1) about translation 2) about non-encyclopedic tone and 3) a delete !vote saying that if IMDB is the only source that it should be deleted. Likely nobody else has !voted because they find it unlikely that a director who seems to have directed several notable films is blatantly non-notable, and the number of editors who are qualified to search in french and determine the notability of a director from the 1970s is likely small. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 01:16, 7 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why does my nomination statement not amount to a substantial analysis?

Any editor is qualified to search in French; it's hardly an obscure language, the search procedure is simple and a high degree of fluency is hardly required to read the showbiz sources that would cover a film director.—S Marshall T/C 08:31, 7 October 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.