Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buck Star

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:07, 5 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Buck Star[edit]

Vanity page SigmaEpsilon → ΣΕ 02:09, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable comedian (edit:or whatever he is). Equendil 02:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I love (and by love, I mean loathe) Buck Star, but he's as non-notable as any reject on any other reality show- and there are many. While it's irrelevant to this discussion, the article is also quite bad. -- Kicking222 02:57, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vanity page of nn "reject" of show.--Jersey Devil 03:46, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This character is notable as a purely arcane pop culture reference. The article is sparse (and likely written by... Buck Star?) but, as a purely historical reference to "that dim-wit who went to EVERY single audition and then bombed..." he deserves note. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.17.17.248 (talk • contribs) .
- Comment above user's third edit to Wikipedia. [1]--Jersey Devil 03:58, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - The Number of edits is irrelevant, that takes nothing from his point.24.16.67.94
  - I concur. This is an open discussion. 3,000 plus edits does not elevate your opinion above a new contributor Jersy Devil. The Wikipedia is open to all. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 205.242.113.10 (talk • contribs) .
Delete not notable on any level. Flunking auditions, no matter how many times, is not notable. The article is orphaned (except for links from deletion articles) for a reason. B.Wind 04:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per the article. "Buck Star is an aspiring entertainer..." Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. T e ke 04:12, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete extremly nn, has no place on Wikipedia. Thetruthbelow^(talk) 05:08, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete While I watched and thought it was funny that he kept showing up, it is indeed, nn. His 15 minutes should be enough. --Geneb1955^Talk/_CVU 05:11, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
delete Surely we don't need an article for every failed contestant of a reality show. OhNo itsJamie ^Talk 05:37, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep he is notable. Just tonight I was watching him on Last Comic Standing and as soon as the show was over I had to come on to Wikipedia to check out his article. JohnM4402 06:29, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, vanity article by some non-notable aspiring comedian. Come back when you're actually famous. JIP | Talk 11:15, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nonnotable plus crystalballism. -- Docether 13:28, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nn and vanity. --Ter e nc e Ong 14:07, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete asserts nn in article Crazynas 15:56, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Welcome to the Buck Star show ladies and gentlemen! - He's only "notable" because he's been rejected, what, fourteen times on Last Comic Standing now? That is to say, he's not notable and I don't think he's the appropriate subject for an encyclopedia article. --Cyde↔Weys 17:50, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. We have deleted via AfD reality "stars" that have been much more successful than Mr. Star on shows that were more notable than LCS. youngamerican (talk) 19:25, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. If and when he does achieve notability (either by actually becoming a star or failing in a truly spectacular fashion, like being rejected 3,000 times), then he can have an article. But keeping this would set a bad precedent–there have been quite a few rejects just in TV history, not to mention film. Biruitorul 20:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. He will have a citation somewhere else. There is a section on the L.C.S. main page asserting the Buck Star character is actually a production assistant for NBC! He may be a complete fabrication. Adexzec 22:35, 31 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The comment about Buck Star being an NBC production assistand mentioned on the above referenced page is a rumor and incorrect. I mention this here only to point out that this should not reflect on the validity of an entry for Buck Star.

Delete as unverifiable unless non-IMDB sources can be found. Fagstein 01:42, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Just by looking at how many people have come to this keep/delete page just further proves that this page should be maintained. As long as people will look up Buck Star, there needs to be a page! Weters 04:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

CommentThese people came here most likely through the Afd page, not through the article. The reason that there is so much dialogue on this is because most people want it deleted quickly. Thetruthbelow^(talk) 05:24, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The comment above is insubtantial, unless there is some proof to be offered. In the end, what does it matter how users get here. The fact is, they are here. Buck Star has become somewhat of a facet of the LCS phenomenon and has transcended the role of a typical contestant. This is evinced by the amount of air time he has received as compared to other contestants (even those who made the cut) on the first episodes (both seasons 2 and 4). This is noteworthy in itself. Beyond this, there is a story to tell, and America (or at least those Americans willing to post on the nbc forums) is eager to hear the final punch-line. The main issue, in my mind, is that the content of the entry is sparse and needs to be updated and completed. This can be remedied. unklcid 22:38, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarcastic note. I don't believe users should vote twice on their first edit ever : Special:Contributions/Unklcid (second vote was removed by User:Zetawoof) -- Equendil Talk 00:35, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Sarcastic reply. Yeah, sorry 'bout that. I get a little over zealous sometimes. I still think the page should be kept. -- unklcid 23:37, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I must concur that the very fact that many users have an opinion on this at all is substantial support of Buck Star's relevance. Also, to those who say that Buck Star being an aspiring comedian who will probably keep performing and auditioning is Crystal Ballism, on the same token saying that he is only a fifteen-minute of fame flash-in-the-pan obscure reference is also crystal-ballism. We can't say that he will ever experience fame and success in a major way, but we also cannot say that his fifteen minutes are up and that he will never succeed beyond this point. The fact that he keeps returning to the show Last Comic Standing, and the fact that they continue to give him a surprising amount of airtime, I think is evidence to support that he will stay consistent in his efforts, and that he is reaching an audience. In fact, this very debate to keep or delete the page is evidence that Buck Star has reached an audience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Doppleganger09 (talk • contribs)
- User's first edit. Zetawoof^(ζ) 08:26, 4 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete This cracker jack is going to quickly fade into obscurity. Does Wikipedia have entries from frequent contestants of The Gong Show? Delete the entry.mcleanpcv

Comment What bothers me here is that what little name recognition this person may have will quickly fade as soon as he quit serial-auditionning, or to put it another way, his "notability" is volatile at best. Equendil Talk 00:43, 5 June 2006 (UTC) Doh, I see the user above made that point already. Equendil Talk 00:44, 5 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.