Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bruce Block

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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bruce Block

Person is non-notable, and article contains no references. Tempodivalse (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

~~Delete~~ Keep based on the sources added, which all show notability Mandsford (talk) 13:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Created by an SPA whose other contributions have been some unsourced comments about Bruce Block. The article's subject is a magician who has been a contestant twice on America's Got Talent, which normally would be a career booster, so I'm surprised that there is no attempt at sourcing. If there isn't any other publicity than this, Bruce needs a press agent. He balances cigar boxes on his chin, which is no less magical than hanging upside down for 60 hours, but not enough to show notability among magicians. Mandsford (talk) 13:22, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:07, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Ignoring the SPA, I believe notabilty can be established. Will have a go at improving a badly written article. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 03:43, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note that, by past precedent, he really needs to show notability above and beyond his AGT appearances. The AGT appearances themselves can be quite easily sourced, right from the small section on him already at the AGT season 3 page. But with last season, it was pretty well established that, unless an act makes it to the finals, AGT appearances by themselves do not establish notability. I'm not going to !vote myself on this one, but just wanted to lay out the precedents for acts that appear on this show. - TexasAndroid (talk) 04:21, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and improved the article per WP:MOS, wikifying it, cleaning it up, and adding cites and sources reliable within his field to show both his notability past AGT and within his peer group. I think it's okay now. Any suggestions? Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 07:47, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Good work by Schmidt. Looks to have decent indication of notability now, beyond the AGT appearances. - TexasAndroid (talk) 13:02, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2008 (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.