|
Matt Lee (musician) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD) (AFD 2 | DRV 1 | DRV 2)
- Endorse (the deletion but could be saved): Overall I have been seeing many articles and names on lists being removed because someone has never heard of the person/band being talked about. Alone that is not a reason for deletion. Likewise the simple fact that there might be a Wiki page about the subject is not the only reason for inclusion either. Original author aside for a moment, if one is to follow the guidelines set at WP:N you have to ask "Did this person receive Significant coverage, enough to warrant a separate article?" But we also must look at WP:PEOPLE and WP:MUSIC to fully decide as this article is about an individual, and a musician.
- Under the subsection Additional criteria you will find the following: A person is generally notable if they meet any of the following standards and you could either look at WP:CREATIVE or WP:ENTERTAINER to decide. However as the subject in question is a musician you will note that it does say See WP:MUSIC for guidelines on musicians, composers, groups, etc. And this is where I feel the most important criteria comes in as it relates to this article. Under the 'Criteria for musicians and ensembles' header it clearly says: Note that members of notable bands are redirected to the band's article, not given individual articles, unless they have demonstrated individual notability for activity independent of the band, such as solo releases. Members of two notable bands are generally notable enough for their own article. So based on the article we are discussing I see only one real band of note - The Divine Horsemen, however their Wiki article is sadly lacking and needs to be worked on but that is another topic/issue. So I would have to say, based on the guidelines as currently written, Matt Lee should not have his own article but a re-direct to the The Divine Horsemen band page.
- To address the actual article. I did not see it prior to today so I can not comment on how it looked in the past. As it reads today much of it seems like personal stories about people that the subject came in contact with rather than achievements of the subject themselves. I want to point out that being a musician while working and living in Hollywood,California will allow a person to come in contact with, and even work/collaborate with many "notable" people but does this alone mean that you are also notable? And if so to what degree? As an example contained in this article we see the subsection named Life After Punk and the section starting off with The next band was the The Mighty Hornets(1988). What follows is several lines about how the drummer was good friend with Billy Idol and goes into a story about how fans rushed the stage at one of his concerts. This, to me, does not belong in the article and does not add any notability to the subject. There are several instances of "Notability by association" in this article and one needs to step back and start to separate the more notable names being dropped and look at only the subject in the article. I find the fact he studied with Ted Greene to be notable as well as the fact he was in a high school cover band with Richard Elliot. But keep in mind the criteria, as currently laid out, for being a musician and having a separate article would not truly accept a high school cover band as being notable, nor would who you took music lessons from. I think, other than being a hard working LA based musician (Of which there are many who do not have their own Wiki article such as Kyle C Kyle, David Provost {the musician, not the mayor of New York City}, Bruce Duff while others only have a small stub that is far from complete - Nickey "Beat" Alexander and Janet Robin for example) I feel the thing that could allow Matt Lee to have his own page is this comment: Today,he does sessions on guitar, bass, and or keyboards for records,commercial and private products and projects. If the article could focus more on this and lay out notable session gigs I think the article would be a keeper. Check out Waddy Wachtel for a good example.
- Soundvisions1 (talk) 15:04, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Added link to 2nd AfD, which appears to be under discussion here, and previous DRV. lifebaka++ 16:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're asking for here. Could you please spell it out for me? Thanks. lifebaka++ 17:01, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The editor who restored (copy paste from somewhere) and added the DRV tag to the page is not the same as the editor above. That person edited the earlier DRV with a keep comment. The edit above looks like they are just giving advice on how the article could be improved to avoid future deletion, whilst endorsing the deletion of the article as it stands. --82.7.39.174 (talk) 18:54, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Yeah, I figure something like that too. If that's the case, and no issues with the deletions are being raised, this can be closed. I do suggest putting the above on the creator's talk page, though. Cheers. lifebaka++ 19:00, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- He's got a major release coming out in December on HepCat records with a band that has a song in a major movie release as well. Does that count? Go to the IMDB credit he has on this wikisite for Bikini Island. Go to the FAQS section and the song is listed there. I am told a major movie does count. Please let me know if I'm wrong.(Joeyboyee (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- See wikipedia is not a crystal ball. The FAQ section of IMDB is user editable and not fact checked, so isn't considered a reliable source e.g. I could go and edit it to say anything I wanted. --82.7.39.174 (talk) 20:27, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If you've got some reliable sources showing that he meets either the general notability guideline or the notability guideline for musicians then I suggest you create a userspace version of the article (at a title that's nice and easy, such as User:Joeyboyee/Matt Lee) and work on it there. Then, when you believe it meets all the relevant guidelines, bring it back here to open up another DRV (or just in this one if it's still running) and have some people take a look at it. If consensus is that it no longer has the issues laid out in the 2nd AfD above, it'll get moved back into the mainspace. Cheers. lifebaka++ 23:53, 28 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you Lifebaka. That helps. I want to point out that the address 82.7.39.174 that said wiki is not a crystal ball is the kind of person that makes this process so annoying. Those kind of comments are not courteous or constructive. I move to put 82.7.39.174's page up for AfD, or at least that last comment. The fact is I have seen that stupid movie and the credit for the song Shot Down is in the film. If they don't have a website for the movie or credits to your guidelines and liking, my question is, can I submit a hard copy of the credit? I can scan a page of the the film's last frames showing the credit. (Joeyboyee (talk) 00:54, 29 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
By the way 82.7.39.174, does'nt your comment remind you of the fact that wiki is set up the same way as IMDB? You can edit BOTH to your heart,if you have one's content.(Joeyboyee (talk) 00:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- You should be able to reference the film itself, actually. Or at least the credits. A reliable website would also be ideal, but not required. Also, rather ironically, Wikipedia isn't a reliable source by Wikipedia's standards, since it has user-generated content. Cheers. lifebaka++ 01:05, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you follow the link I provided? It's a core policy on the matter and is entitled "Wikipedia is not a crystal ball", sorry you think pointing you to the core policy and title to it is not courteous or constructive. I cannot see how directing you to see the core policy on the matter is neither, if you are going to avoid the issues faced you need to be pointed to the approriate policies, perhaps you'd be less frustrated by the process if you didn't try and take offense by the policies or people pointing you to the appropriate places. As for wikipedia suffering the same issue as being user edited, yes I'm quite aware of that, it's why we don't accept other wikipedia projects as reliable sources and why we have such things as Wikipedia:Citing Wikipedia which caution against using us as a source or Wikipedia:Academic use which goes further still. --82.7.39.174 (talk) 06:22, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm wondering how many times we're going to deal with this. It was brought up last night at AN, where two more versions posted concurrently were removed and some socks blocked. Look, the article has been recreated many, many times at Matt Lee, Matt Lee (musician), [[Matt Lee {guitarist}]], and various other places. It exists right now at User:Spartaz/Musician in the condition that it has been in through most of the most recent deletions - basically, the article's been identical through the last I don't know how many recreations (and, essentially, the same since the last AFD). So, if you want to sift through those references and actually find something that indicates it's Plus, we've got obvious sockpuppet problems with this. It looks like a concerted effort to get Matt Lee a Wiki page, when really he hasn't built up the reliable references that are needed to meet notability. Mention him in the band articles, that's fine (if they're notable). But solo, I - and many others - don't feel the notability is there. Endorse multiple deletions. If someone can turn up some actual, real, good references to back up the notability, I'd reconsider. I haven't seen them yet. Tony Fox (arf!) 04:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse Deletion, the second AfD seems to have come to a pretty clear consensus to delete once the SPAs and WP:ILIKEIT arguments have been filtered out. If Lee ever becomes notable, then he can and should have an article, but not before. Lankiveil (speak to me) 12:00, 29 September 2008 (UTC).[reply]
Close this DRV The last DRV was 18 September 2008 and there has not been any material changes over the past eleven days. -- Suntag ☼ 21:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Revised per Spartaz's comments below. -- Suntag ☼ 21:03, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse as closer. Once the SPA are discounted, there is a clear consensus that this musician does not approach notability. I should point out that I'm the one who salted this repeatedly recreated article prompting (I'm guessing) this DRV. — Coren (talk) 21:39, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I closed the previous DRV because an ip editor was using it as a platform to attack good faith editors. The close was procedural and does not preclude a proper DRV running. Spartaz Humbug! 06:13, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse, deletion process followed correctly, WP:SPAs are counselled that obsessively re-creating content and using sock/meatpuppets in deletion debates may have the exact opposite of the desired effect. Guy (Help!) 13:39, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse - The closer interpreted AfD 2nd correctly. -- Suntag ☼ 21:02, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep deleted, no clear and convincing reason presented why any of the previous consensi should be disregarded. Stifle (talk) 08:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
|
