Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry C
- 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 of the debate was delete. --Ezeu 16:16, 7 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Jerry C[edit]
the page appears to be a vanity page, possibly created by the person himself rather than the page of an accomplished singer/band. Dbertman 10:36, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- OpposeThis is not a "vanity page". He is an accomplished guitarist and is currently in the process of releasing an album, I will compromise and remove the "accomplished" and "talented" in the article as I can see how that isn't neutral. Is that OK? Thunder Cat
- He has done a tour of Taiwan thus shouldn't he meet the standards? This is proved on the website, there are videos to prove as such. Thunder Cat 10:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think I've made my opposition clear and I have, for want of a better term, stated my defense so I prepose that article is allowed to remain and improve. Thunder Cat 11:16, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If you're saying the tour is not notable well it doesn't have to be, only the source of verification does and the source of verification is his website which has videos of it and I'm sure, given time, I could show other sources that are undisputable. Thunder Cat 13:03, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. if you look on you tube he gets loads of views on his videos so he will be notable. cannon got 31,889 viewings. so he must be notable to some point if that many people are going to watch just 1 of his videos 82.118.120.209 13:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Having a video on YouTube is not a sign of notability. Maybe he does meet one or more of the WP:MUSIC criteria, but the article currently doesn't indicate that or show how it can be verified. If the article is revised to indicate why he qualifies under WP:MUSIC with sources, I may reconsider. --Metropolitan90 15:52, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Well if he meets some of the criteria he the article remains as an article only has to meet one of the criteria to be able to remain. I will use your advice and revise the article and be sure to include sources but I will need some time to do so so could we remove it from the list for deletion as a small recess so I can do so? Thunder Cat 16:18, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: You've got five days before the article is deleted. If you can't come up with sources in that time, he's not notable. Cheers --Pak21 16:54, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't suppose I'm going to get any help? Thunder Cat 16:28, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm quite new so could you elaborate on "repost" Eagleman please? Rather than just delete surely we could just put it as cleanup and help yourselves to make it better? Thunder Cat 16:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: the article Jerry C has already been created on Wikipedia once, and then deleted on 9 April under speedy deletion criteria A7, namely "Unremarkable people or groups/Vanity Pages". With respect to cleanup, you're missing the point here slightly: editors are suggesting deletion not because it's currently a bad article, but because it has no potential to be a good article, as the subject is (as far as anyone can tell) not notable. Cheers --Pak21 16:59, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, alright that seems very reasonable and I wasn't aware someone had made the article in the past but if and when he releases his album will that make him notable? Thunder Cat 17:15, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd recommend that (if they've been on significant - major or important indie - labels with a national distribution), plus touring details. Be sure to give independent references (after all, they do get checked). Best of luck in the future. B.Wind 18:26, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Oppose. I am not familiar with the Wikipedia submission process, but I have been asked to argue in favor of a JerryC Wikipedia submission. JerryC is without a doubt an Internet phenomenon. Youtube, Google Video, and many other video sharing sites are populated with hundreds of videos of people covering (copying/playing) JerryC's Canon Rock. JerryC videos became popular because of the stark contrast between his high end guitar & compositional talent juxtaposed against the humble back drop of his tatty bedroom. If he had recorded his videos on stage, I'm sure few people would have noticed. However, he does currently have a huge Internet following. I run a non profit JerryC video link site: [[1]]. I have no financial or contractual link with JerryC (in fact I've only emailed him twice). My site gets 40,000 Unique visitors per month, and has had 8.5 million hits in the last 5 months. I would say, that's popular. I think at the very least, JerryC should get a mention on the Internet phenomenon page, but really deserves his own link. It's not about promoting him as an artist, but more about documenting the Internet ripple his video's have caused (the Canon Rock covers). Megazoid --82.152.166.122 19:45, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Surely if someone has tried to make an article in the past and there are so many viewings he must be at least a "notable artist". As to verifying the amount of viewings one can simply go on the websites listed. As Megazoid runs the website he can issue proof to verify the amount of hits he recieves and one can simply look at the number of hits on You Tube. Thunder Cat 20:09, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The definiton of notable is worthy of note, remarkable or a person of distinction. Jery C is worthy of note, he is remarkable and he is a person of distinction. He is a very talented guitarist, one could easily say he is a virtuoso. Not only this but he is also a very competant drummer and pianist. Not only this but he is very distinctive as the music he plays is very different to what one would normally hear, unique even, apart from his covers of course! There is a vast amount of interest in him all over the internet so surely he is a notable artist at the very least. Thunder Cat 20:39, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong delete as non-notable per WP:MUSIC and as necessarily unverifiable (per WP:RS) in any event. Joe 22:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That definition of notable is becoming out of date as there are other people who are popular and notable on the internet alone. Jerry C is an example of them and we should reform our definition of notable to accept people like him. Does it also not say if the rules hinder the improvement of Wikipedia you should ignore them? Thunder Cat 08:34, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- This needs to be discussed at the village pump, not in the middle of an AfD, in which we must follow the established guidelines. For the time being WP:MUSIC, WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:NOT establish the rules under which this process is run now. Oh, I forgot WP:MUSIC, WP:WEB and WP:BIO. B.Wind 01:36, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Verification The 15th most viewed video on YouTube, is a cover (copy) of JerryC's Canon Rock video by a young Malaysian - FunTwo. Simply titled "guitar" [[2]], it shows Funtwo playing an unaltered version of JerryC's composition in the same setting (his bedroom). It has had 4,612,731 views, and was mentioned in an article on The New York Times website [[3]]. JerryC is mentioned in both the video, and the article. JerryC's original Canon Rock video has been posted so many times on YouTube, that it has diluted its true ranking unfortunately. A Google search for the term "JerryC" produces 134,000 results [[4]]. It is interesting to note, that this is more results, than some of the band entries currently listed on the wikipedia Internet_phenomenon page. For example: "Lemon Demon" [[5]] produces 124,000 results. I personally feel the submitted JerryC page needs to be edited heavily, but some reference to JerryC is warranted on wikipedia. Megazoid --82.152.166.122 14:06, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
OK, this discussion has gone round and round. The bottom line is that Wikipedia is not an agent of promotion. This article is premature... It's time to delete it until WP:MUSIC is established. Of course, an encyclopedic article would discuss in some length his work (preferably spelled correctly - misspellings stand out when they're red links). I'd be more inclined to accept the article if it truly had significant substance besides the POV/biographical first paragraph. Admins, is it time to invoke WP:SNOW? B.Wind 01:47, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right. He isn't notable so I'll just wait until he releases his albums but yeah go ahead and delete it. Thunder Cat 19:39, 6 June 2006 (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.