Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph "Corky" Coker
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 When keep commenters point to an online sockpuppeting incident as a reason for notability, they damage their own cause, and cast some doubt on their own motives. Anons/SPAs discounted. Xoloz 02:42, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity page added by an apparent associate of Mr. Coker (User:CokerTire) --Flex 12:55, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. MER-C 14:08, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Maelnuneb (Talk) 20:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Rename to "Corky Coker" Qmax 21:38, 6 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep page, Corky Coker is an icon in the restoration community. If it was not for Mr. Coker it would be very difficult to get period correct bias ply whitewall tires. --68.214.216.253 (talk · contribs)
- Delete Natalieduerinckx 14:15, 11 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. The subject is sufficiently notable. He is a former chairman of the board of SEMA, and he is the president of President of a prominent company in the automotive aftermarket industry. Info-freedom. Also, he is somewhat famous for an online sockpuppeting incident, described here: http://www.hotrodders.com/corky-coker.html 03:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
- Does a reliable source start with, "We think that Corky Coker, of Coker Tire, is a jerk. Actually, we think a lot worse of him, but all we're going to say is 'jerk'"? I also question whether that "famous" incident is at all notable in the context of the Wikipedia. (NB, I have no connection with Mr. Coker, with the forums mentioned, or with hot-rodding of any sort. I stumbled upon this page and nominated it for deletion for the reasons given above.) --Flex 13:00, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In considering the action, the word "Jerk" seems intentionally restrained. Many "reliable" sources have made much worse claims about individuals. Reliability is established when the allegations match the facts. If you doubt the reliability of the information, you can call up Coker Tire on the phone. Also, you can call up Discovery Channel or SEMA. Regarding notability, I had made a strong case for it in the article's discussion page. In addition to the notablility of the described episode, the fact that Coker Tire is involved in an extremely blatant vanity article attempt on Wikipedia lends notability to the previous incident. Anyway, Qmax deleted my discussion comments, although an administrator was kind enough to restore them to the discussion page, where you can now view them. This is the second time that my comments had been deleted from the discussion page in an attempt to cover-up the information. BTW, Qmax's request to "rename" is being done for search engine optimization purposes. He wants the page to rank well for the phrase "Corky Coker". This is why he wants it to be titled exactly as such, rather than with the more appropriate title which lists first and last name, as well as nickname. For example, see this entry in Qmax's blog: http://chattablogs.com/quintus/archives/040292.html .--Info-freedom 15:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I'll let the community decide about the reliability of that source and the notability of Mr. Coker, but while I agree that your comments should not have been deleted from the talk page, I don't think this article can stand on its own merits apart from any alleged "cover-up." --Flex 15:35, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- User:Info-freedom suggested I explicitly cite WP:VAIN#What_is_encyclopedic? in regard to the "famous" discussion board incident. As far as I can tell, Coker was allegedly involved in spamming to a discussion board and following it up with some sock puppetry. Those are not crimes and are not worthy of mention in an encyclopedia as I read the guidelines. --Flex 18:43, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Agreed w/Flex, "not encyclopedic" is a reasonable argument for deletion. Although, it's interpretive. Regarding the nature of the incident as not a crime, Coker's sock puppetry incident may constitute the crime of a threat, or the crime of wire fraud. In the referenced post note how Coker puts the administrator's first and last name, and his town and state of residence, as the title of his post. In addition, he falsifies his location. Rather than entering his home state, he enters CO, the administrator's home state. In his post, he says: "watch what you say and who you say it to. You never know when it may really come back to bite you." This veiled threat, coupled with falsifying his location such that it is the same as the forum administrator's, may constitute a crime. In addition, I contend that the resultant wave in the industry from this episode is notable, rather than the encapsulated episode itself.--Info-freedom 19:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The discussion about the Coker's sock puppetry should probably go back to Talk:Joseph "Corky" Coker, but I will say here that unless he was convicted or officially charged with a crime, you may not raise that allegation here. That is original research and perhaps libel. --Flex 20:21, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- In considering the action, the word "Jerk" seems intentionally restrained. Many "reliable" sources have made much worse claims about individuals. Reliability is established when the allegations match the facts. If you doubt the reliability of the information, you can call up Coker Tire on the phone. Also, you can call up Discovery Channel or SEMA. Regarding notability, I had made a strong case for it in the article's discussion page. In addition to the notablility of the described episode, the fact that Coker Tire is involved in an extremely blatant vanity article attempt on Wikipedia lends notability to the previous incident. Anyway, Qmax deleted my discussion comments, although an administrator was kind enough to restore them to the discussion page, where you can now view them. This is the second time that my comments had been deleted from the discussion page in an attempt to cover-up the information. BTW, Qmax's request to "rename" is being done for search engine optimization purposes. He wants the page to rank well for the phrase "Corky Coker". This is why he wants it to be titled exactly as such, rather than with the more appropriate title which lists first and last name, as well as nickname. For example, see this entry in Qmax's blog: http://chattablogs.com/quintus/archives/040292.html .--Info-freedom 15:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Does a reliable source start with, "We think that Corky Coker, of Coker Tire, is a jerk. Actually, we think a lot worse of him, but all we're going to say is 'jerk'"? I also question whether that "famous" incident is at all notable in the context of the Wikipedia. (NB, I have no connection with Mr. Coker, with the forums mentioned, or with hot-rodding of any sort. I stumbled upon this page and nominated it for deletion for the reasons given above.) --Flex 13:00, 12 October 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.