Jump to content

Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 October 31

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Deletion review | Log

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 74.34.48.114 (talk) at 18:40, 1 November 2006 (→Landon Ashworth). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

< October 30 November 1 >
Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 October)

31 October 2006

Landon Ashworth

In this DRV, I'd like to overturn the decisions by admin User:Aecis, who has deleted Landon Ashworth. Landon is the lead role in multi million dollar budgeted movie Zombies! Zombies! Zombies! http://www.fangoria.com/news_article.php?id=2842 that has major distribution to movie theatres. He is also on the cover from Abercrombie and Fitch of this Quarters Catalogue. It was pointed out that Landon can't be found on Google, but his birth name was not searched on Google which was posted on the Wikipedia page for Landon Ashworth... He is sometimes credited by his birth name. That should clear up any confusion. Landon should be added. He has had LEAD roles in movies, not just small guest appearances. Landon meets the critera for article review, and meets the critera for being on Wikipedia under the model, actor, and musican sub catagories. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.34.48.114 (talk • contribs)

  • As the deleting admin, I would like to begin my explanation by referring to this edit by 74.34.48.114 (talk · contribs), which constitutes a threat to disrupt wikipedia. I would also like to point to an edit by his account Pilotdmb (talk · contribs), who said to User:Shannernanner of the article on Landon Ashworth: "Being on Wikipedia will help his exposure in life and help people learn of his talent and giving. Let him be added. You're the only one causing problems, and this could further his exposure. You stand nothing to lose if he's added. He has everything to gain by the exposure." This indicates that Ashworth is not notable, and that wikipedia is needed to give him the push towards notability. While I wish him the best in his career, that is not what wikipedia is for. Ashworth failed the google test miserably, he is not listed by iMDB, nor is the upcoming movie Zombies! Zombies! Zombies!, which means that the information is barely verifiable at best. The combination of "Zombies! Zombies! Zombies!" and "Ashworth" gives only two google hits, and one of these links is dead. This is extremely little for the "lead role" in a "multi million dollar budgeted movie" with "major distribution". He is not listed as part of the cast of the movie on any reputable horror site. The Fangoria link provided above simply shows that he is in the movie, but it doesn't say anything about the notability of his role. His modelling work and his charity work do not pass WP:BIO, and having occassionally played the drums for Gavin DeGraw does not meet WP:MUSIC. An indication of the latter: The combination of "Landon Ashworth" and "Gavin DeGraw" gives only four google hits, all to myspace profiles. It's even worse with other spellings of "DeGraw". Aecis Dancing to electro-pop like a robot from 1984. 10:32, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse not deleting per above reasoning. This appears to be garden-variety vanispamcruftisement. Guy 10:53, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse not deleting if the trivial mention in the Fangoria link and being on the cover of a catalogue are the best claims to fame that can be found. Angus McLellan (Talk) 17:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse Not Deleting the rules given by aecis are lame and Landon passes all google tests if you would seach his birth name... which was given on his Wikipedia link page if aecis wouldn't have been a rocket scientist and taken it down.

Userfied Userboxes

In this DRV, I'd like to overturn the decisions by admin User:Centrx, who has deleted 9 userfied userboxes, most with the summary Divisive template. Now, I might be mistaken, but I believe that's T1. T1 is for template space. I'm using red links on User:Rfrisbie/Userboxes/Political Parties to get what I can find, but I might have missed some. Remember, we're not talking about template userboxes, but userfied ones. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk) 22:10, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Overturn. T1 doesn't work for user space. If you really want to push to get rid of these, go through MfD. The whole idea of userfying these in the first place is that as stringent of rules do not apply to user space as do to template space. If these boxes had been slanderous or attack natured I would say to take it to MfD or even CSD, but these are basic identification boxes. --StuffOfInterest 22:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn. As above - If it's in the user space, it really cannot come under a template CSD. Martinp23 22:27, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn, per Wikipedia:Let sleeping dogs lie. Let's do what Jimbo suggested, which was to use reason and dialogue to persuade people that Wikipedia shouldn't be used for political flag-waving, all the while allowing users to do pretty much what they want in Userspace, and insisting that POV boxes not remain in Templatespace. This is a good compromise that effectively ended the so-called userbox wars, and I disagree with any attempt to start up that horrible quagmire of drama again. Those opposed to userboxes would do well to get on the ball as far as trying to convince people through dialogue that political userboxes are inappropriate. Please, let's not try to short-circuit the process of dialogue and acculturation; it leads to bad things. -GTBacchus(talk) 22:39, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn, per Martinp23. — Deon555talkReview 22:44, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn Userspace != Templatespace. Please don't apply CSD to spaces they don't belong to. CharonX/talk 23:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn All, including the ones that I didn't nominate, and including any future ones found. -Royalguard11(Talk·Desk) 00:00, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Ministry of Truth ones is a sockpuppet using Wikipedia as his personal playground. —Centrx→talk • 00:12, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn and restore all of the deleted userboxes. The whole purpose of the userbox migration was to permit userboxes like these since they're not allowed in the template namespace. Speedy deletion criteria for templates don't apply because of this. These userboxes don't look like they violate any of the normal rules for properly-userfied userboxes, and deleting them could upset the compromise that the German Userbox Solution provided. —Cswrye 01:07, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The compromise is to smooth relations with Wikipedians, not because userboxes have any inherent value and Jimbo repeatedly states that userboxes of this sort are not normal and accepted behavior. The compromise does not apply to someone who created an account purely to create userboxes. —Centrx→talk • 05:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • I agree with this comment. The compromise userbox migration (formerly known as the German Solution), is not based on the idea that userboxes have a rightful place as part of Wikipedia, simply that we wanted the fighting to stop. On the other hand, I agree with Cswrye that the compromise is delicate enough that deletions like this could be a threat to the peace. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn all except User:Nightmare X/Userbox/JEWSDIDWTC T1 does not apply to userspace. No valid reasons for deleting others visible in deletion logs or provided in the explanation here by the deleter. Also overturn the talk pages where they had them, the only one I've found was: User talk:Disavian/Userboxes/marxist. GRBerry 02:59, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn all except the one GRBerry pointed out, per above. T1 doesn't work in userspace. --Coredesat 07:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to those saying "T1 doesn't apply in userspace" - I don't think that's true. More accurately, T1 has generally been interpreted far more leniently in userspace than in templatespace. In template space, a userbox simply has to be unrelated to the encyclopedia to count as "divisive". In userspace, only very divisive JEWSDIDWTC-type boxes are generally taken to be "divisive". This is all per the German Solution and Jimbo's endorsement thereof. -GTBacchus(talk) 08:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Is it really necessary to muddy the water on where T1 can be used and to what degree it should be applied in different spaces? For a situation like JEWSDIDWTC, G10 is if anything more applicable. In most, if not all, cases I believe there are other deletion criteria which can be used on items like this in user space without dragging a template criteria in. --StuffOfInterest 12:40, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Would it not be better to keep all the existing "User X" userboxes and use the German userbox solution on new ones?? --SunStar Net 10:22, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Just to make my position clear, I support the deletion of User:Nightmare X/Userbox/JEWSDIDWTC - this box was a direct violation of "no attacks" which is deleteable under WP:CSD-G10. Regarding the deletion of the User:The Ministry of Truth userboxes, I do not know if or if not (s)he was an abusive sockpuppet, if so I can somewhat understand the actions, though I believe there were better options, like allowing users to adopt the userboxes. Finally regarding the other userboxes, merely being political as in "This user supports %PARTY%" is not and should not be a reason for speedy deletion in userspace. Otherwise its only a small step until "This user is a furry", "This user is an atheist" or "This user is straight" are deleted citing similar reasons. Honor the compromise we found (based on Jimbo's suggestion which was also acknowledged by him), lest we get another continuation of the userbox wars. CharonX/talk 12:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn and restore. Either Wikipedia has administrative integrity or it doesn't when it comes to clear messages by Jimbo on more latitude for userboxes in userspace. The greatest danger of allowing such deletions to hold is the alienation and departure of many serious editors who happen to at least not hate userboxes, but also definitely hate authoritarian workplace bullying by overbearing admins. Rfrisbietalk 13:25, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Overturn all except the one GRBerry pointed out, per above. T1 doesn't work in userspace —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Agathoclea (talk • contribs) .
  • Overturn and restore all but the JEWSDIDWTC one. Actions such as these speedy deletions can easily be seen as the admin community's attempt to destroy all userboxes in direct contravention of the userbox migration compromise that showed such promise in ending the wars. The basis of that compromise was that T1 doesn't apply in userspace. T1 was merely a convenient excuse for user-hostile admins to destroy userboxes right and left, despite Jimbo's exhortation to not go on any deletion sprees. I mean, how can a userbox saying "this user is an organ donor" be divisive and inflammatory?...yet it was deleted under T1. Destroying that compromise will only result in the resumption of the userbox wars and the associated perception among the peons that admins don't care about them. As for JEWSDIDWTC, even though T1 doesn't apply in userspace, other CSD most certainly do, and nobody is saying that userboxes that violate other CSD shouldn't go as well. Jay Maynard 15:34, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

TetraSoft

Okay, it's fixed. NO ADVERTISING OF ANY KIND. Will you please not delete the page this time? I'm new to Wikipedia, and I simply modeled this page after other pages I had seen. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Davisrichardg (talk • contribs) .

The nominator and creator of this article posted a different version of the article, which did not assert notability - I have redeleted it. If the creator insists on creating a non-speediable article and doesn't want to do it all in one go then I suggest he uses a page in userspace, e.g. User:Davisrichardg/TetraSoft, and ensures that the article asserts notability before moving it to mainspace. However it would be far better if he let someone who wasn't the founder of the company create an article. --Sam Blanning(talk) 18:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I just deleted it again. Word for word recreation by a new account. The account was blocked as username, but it could just as well be a sockpuppet. --StuffOfInterest 15:46, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And it was immediately recreated again by a new user, Rae Sellsrome. I've now salted and protected the page until this DRV can be settled. I'm also considering perma-blocking the user. --StuffOfInterest 15:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
You'll never guess the name of the CEO of TetraSoft... Guy 22:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I also deleted the sixteen redirects that Richard G Davis created to the article he wrote on his company. Spam, much? Guy 11:02, 1 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Barats and Bereta

This article was speedy deleted as a non-notable bio. I had originally put an importance tag on the article when it was created and the authors brought it to my attention that these two had signed a deal with NBC based on the popularity of their internet videos. Further searching brought forth articles from Variety [1] and Backstage [2], two very notable media publications, which I added to the article. I believe that Barats and Bereta are, in fact, notable and these news articles illustrate it. IrishGuy talk 17:29, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yamanote Halloween Train

Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Yamanote_Halloween_Train

I'm sorry, but I think this page was deleted against the general consensus and so should be restored. There were 10 keeps and 5 deletes in the discussion.

  • The 10 keeps might have been short time users, but many of them were from Tokyo. They might not be serious wikepedians, but they are interested in this particular article with good reasons: they are Wikipedia readers and know the info is useful.
  • The sysop contended the article was not noteworthy, but as a resident of Tokyo, I do find it of local interest and so noteworthy, even if I (strongly) disapprove of the party.
  • The event is traditional (20 years or more) and well documented and generates lots of hits on Google. Documentation might not meet the high standards of Academia, but they should be fine for Wikipedia. One of the top hits is with Crisscross, which owns Metropolis Tokyo's foremost English foreign community magazine.

Vincent 07:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The proponents, who claimed that the event is well-documented, failed to produce this documentation, defering instead to anecdotal comments. El_C 07:32, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AFD is not a vote. It looks like one, it has a lot in common with one, but it isn't a vote. It's an attempt to achieve a consensus decision, or failing that, to measure community feeling.

Several registered users saying something does not outweigh one anon saying something else, if the lone anon's arguments are stronger.

The opinions of newcomers and outsiders count, but not always at full value - sometimes they just aren't representative of the wider wikipedian community.

The closing admin uses the page to make a decision, considering first the weight of argument, and then perhaps the weight of numbers. Mistakes happen, which is why WP:DRV exists. The raw numbers are a part of the process, sometimes they they are even the major part of it, but it's not a vote.

Regards, Ben Aveling 07:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was the first particiant in that AFD to recommend a keep. I'm not a gaijin, have never been to Japan, and I have a long history of participation in AFD.
However, after reviewing the AFD, I see that had I come back to it after my initial comment, I would have felt bound to acknowledge that I was mistaken. As pointed out in the discussion, my google test was simply wrong. (I usually take care to try both with the subject in quotes and without, and don't know what I was doing then). So I would probably have changed my recommendation from "keep" to "neutral" or "delete".
The interesting thing about the rest of the discussion is that while there were many contribs from people who claimed first-hand experience, there was very little by way of verifiable sources. So I have to conclude that the closing admin acted very properly in not counting just votes, but weighing the evidence offered. I think that El_C got this one right, and that deletion was the correct outcome. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:20, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse deletion, close was well-reasoned and AfD is not a vote. This does not prevent later re-creation with sources to support both the content and its supposed significance. Guy 12:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Endorse deletion as has already been said, AfD is not a vote and does not go by raw numbers. Those who supported the article failed to produce reliable sources that would have allowed the information in the article to be verified. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]


Hi, i'm a relatively new user, and I admit that the documentation for the Yamanote Halloween Train was poor, which is why I added some to the talk page apparently immediately before deletion. Therefore, i'm going to provide links that prove that this annual event, whether considered acceptable or not by Wikipedians, does in fact exist.

http://www.japanprobe.com/?p=657 This is a permanent link from japanprobe, which contains a 2:04 long video of the 2006 Yamanote Halloween Train celebration, as well as a brief description of it.
http://japundit.com/archives/2005/11/10/1491/ This is also a permanent link from Japundit that describes in detail the history and 2005 party on the Yamanote Halloween Train, providing pictures as well.
http://www.gaijinpot.com/bb/showthread.php?t=28395 This is a forum post from gaijinpot (The self-proclaimed #1 site for foreigners in Japan) discussing preperations for the 2006 Yamanote Halloween Train celebration, including the exact date, time, and starting station.
I hope the above aids in proving that this a real event with substantial evidence (As I read above at one point, it may not be sufficient for academia but for wikipedia this appears to be solid evidence), and a cultural event involving mainly foreigners every year around Halloween in Japan. Thank you for your time.

Isikari 8:14, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2006_October_31&oldid=85083066"