Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/JDOG (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to The Pickup Artist (TV series). Overall consensus here seems to be that, while this person has received some coverage, it is all in the context of the TV show: insufficient notability has been demonstrated for a separate article. ~ mazca ^talk 06:51, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

JDOG

Delete - An appearance on The Pick-Up Artist does not make this person notable. Chicago Smooth (talk) 09:11, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

~~Comment but leaning towards delete~~ Delete - I ran out of time and so will just document where I'm at.

Summary - zero verified evidence of notability at this point. --Marc Kupper|talk 00:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In the previous round I had been using my local library database. This time I used the Google Scholar, Books, and News links at the top of this AfD to look for evidence of notability.

Summary - Unable to find any evidence of notability. I commented on the lack of WP:ENT potential below. Decision changed from Comment but leaning towards delete to Delete. --Marc Kupper|talk 09:17, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep. For various reasons, the top two: is one of the main guys on a VH1 show, & this (to me) appears to be a clear case of a person getting upset their own articles got deleted (presumably about themselves) and then went on a spree of deleting other articles in the same topic area (seduction community). Mathmo ^Talk 11:09, 9 September 2009 (UTC) http://www.seattlepi.com/lifestyle/327680_single16.html?source=mypi http://www.wweek.com/editorial/3342/9498/ http://www.ocregister.com/entertainment/pickup-mystery-artist-1791692-eight-women http://articles.latimes.com/2008/nov/09/entertainment/ca-monitor9 http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet/2007/08/01/pickup_artist/print.html[reply]

All of those links look great for the The Pickup Artist (TV series) article which currently does not have any WP:N sources at all. None of them cover JDOG in detail. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:48, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Strong keep WP:Pointy, disruptive nomination from a WP:SPA WP:COI editor who threatened to delete all other notable seduction biography articles if his were deleted. Theserialcomma (talk) 15:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

response to both of the Strong keeps. I agree that the nominator's motives appear suspicious but I personally don't care as it does not influence the notability (or lack of) for JDOG who is the subject of this AfD. Being "one of the main guys on a VH1 show" is not a notable point per WP:N or WP:PEOPLE. So far, JDOG is appearing to be less notable per WP:N than Alan Roger Currie. --Marc Kupper|talk 20:17, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you check out WP:PEOPLE under entertainers you will see he meets (at the very least) points 1 & 2 (and arguably #3 too). As he is a main character on a hit tv show in its second season (at least, could be even a third planned? I'm a bit out of touch with the latest developments of MM) and he has a large fan base. As a person only has to meet one of the points I would say JDog easily passes muster here. Mathmo ^Talk 20:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding WP:ENT - I had looked the other night and did not see that he met any of these. The VH1 cable network seemed weakly notable (only one article in the references covers the subject) but let's assume the network is "notable." The The Pickup Artist (TV series) show needs WP:N TLC as it does not have a single supporting reference for notability. Let's pretend the show is notable. JDOG's role lasted one season and that was as one of the two "wings" for the show's main presenter. One season as a wing on this show is not WP:ENT #1. WP:ENT #2 and #3 would need reliable secondary sources that state he has a large cult/fan base or has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment. I did not find any reliable secondary sources much less one that made claims applicable to WP:ENT #2 or #3. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:22, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Not notable enough to meet Wikipedia's standard. A lot facts and claims can not be verified. Handrem (talk) 20:51, 9 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you believe there are issues with the contents of the current article then you can edit it yourself to correct it, this is the way such a claimed issue should be dealt with. Not by outright deletion. Mathmo ^Talk 20:10, 12 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The only issue being covered by this AfD is if the subject of the article is notable. --Marc Kupper|talk 07:39, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Pickup Artist (TV series). It's his only claim to notability, but there are no independent sources to support a separate article. Cmprince (talk) 00:37, 17 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Pickup Artist (TV series) or Seduction community. Not enough evidence of notability for a separate article.--Blargh29 (talk) 04:06, 17 September 2009 (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.