Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Uncle Yo

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 14:19, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Uncle Yo[edit]

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

This is my first AfD, so take my words with a grain of salt. But this appears to me to lack reliable secondary sources; given sources are from artist's web page, convention press releases reposted at anime news portals, and ~~two blogs~~ a blog of unknown significance. This article does not appear to meet the notability guidelines at WP:ENT. Khazar (talk) 01:01, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As the article's creator, I suggested this AfD on article's talk page for a quick "trial by fire" to resolve the issue of notability (comments on reliability are welcome as well, but a bit outside the scope here). I believe that while the subject is relatively young and niche, he has achieved sufficient notability to be encyclopedic, as demonstrated by several mentions at Anime News Network, convention websites, several interviews (many in the podcast/video form), and several thousands google'able mentions. Having created over a 1,000 articles, I will agree that this is a bit of a borderline case, but I believe that this is on the correct side of the notability border (otherwise I wouldn't have wasted my time creating this bio... :>). This is not some wannabe with a youtube video and few local appearances, this is a professional that has been invited to numerous notable, regional/national and encyclopedic (if niche) events, and who was mentioned by numerous secondary (if online-only) sources. PS. I am still unsure where the nom sees two blogs, I see only one used once (for a minor fact from a blogged interview). I don't use blogs as sources, usually, but a recent blogged interview confirming a trivial fact seemed passable. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:11, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right. Seeing double, apparently. 1,000 articles, btw? Kudos! -- Khazar (talk) 01:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, the list takes a while to load, thanks. Now, two or three have been deleted, so I could be wrong this time too. I hope I am not, of course :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:19, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Article completely lacks any significant coverage from reliable third-party sources that are independent of the subject. Convention announcements about being the person as a guest are not significant overage nor are they completely independence of the subject. And interviews are definitely not independent of the subject. Number of Google hits is irrelevant. "demonstrated by several mentions at Anime News Network" actually turns up false as the person has received no coverage by ANN outside of its forms and press releases.[1] (click the news and views) Compare this to Man-Faye, who revived a lot more covarage[2] and appeared several times on national television (such as the The Tonight Show and Who Wants to Be a Superhero?), but still his article was deleted because the coverage he relieved wasn't of significant depth or independent enough from the subject. —Farix (t | c) 02:30, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. None of the independent coverage is from RS, and being the GOH at a con doesn't confer notability, as far as I know. Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 07:49, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Non notable, fails WP:BIO. Paste _{Let’s have a chat.} 17:31, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Request: if it is deleted, please userfy it in my userspace. Thanks, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:27, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as subject lacks coverage in reliable third-party sources and thus fails to cross the notability threshold. Convention websites writing about their own guests are not third-party sources. - Dravecky (talk) 06:51, 18 May 2011 (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.