Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/J. J. Osbun

Add links
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.  Sandstein  08:39, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

J. J. Osbun[edit]

J. J. Osbun (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE. Google News search reveals zero results. Based on comments to date at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Slycat21, I believe this may also be a COI or even WP:AUTOBIO article. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:12, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 13:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:22, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
COI and Autobio are not relevant in this AfD discussion. STSC (talk) 08:56, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, they are relevant. Per Wikipedia:Autobiography: "Articles that exist primarily to advance the interests of the contributor will likely be deleted."--Rpclod (talk) 05:12, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The article is not an autobiography as it stands. STSC (talk) 19:58, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep - The source: www.monarex.com given by the article is good enough to support its notability. STSC (talk) 00:33, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • There isn't a single independent reliable source in that link that offers significant coverage of Osbun. The Cannes market supplement is paid advertorial. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 02:06, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There are multiple reliable sources from Global Times, Business of Film and others.
"If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability" - WP:BIO
STSC (talk) 08:48, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete- Keep - Changing my !vote per WP:BIO@WP:CREATIVE after finding multiple references in Chinese and Australian media to Osbun and his film, "The Truth" some of which are now sourced in the Wiki article. At least two of these sources specifically mention or interview Osbun, producer of the film. He has "created or played a major role in co-creating a significant or well-known work" which has been the subject of "Multiple independent articles or reviews." His documentary may not be significant or well-known in the U.S., but it certainly seems to be in China. ABF99 (talk) 15:54, 16 August 2015 (UTC) This is obviously an accomplished individual, but there are no references here to support notability as per Wikipedia guidelines, and I couldn't find any reliable sources about him online that were not promotional.)ABF99 (talk) 05:34, 15 August 2015 (UTC) [reply]
  • Delete - My searches found nothing good at all to suggest improvement and better notability. SwisterTwister talk 06:38, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of China-related deletion discussions. STSC (talk) 09:06, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
He is notable for his documentary films on China-related issues. STSC (talk) 10:47, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Hi STSC, I would humbly suggest that this discussion will determine if the article subject is WP:NOTABLE. While the subject may have worked on films on China-related issues, that does not mean that their biography is China-related. It is clearly scope creep, and might reasonably be construed as WP:CANVASSing. I respectfully invite you to self-revert. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 10:57, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I repeat - He is notable for his films about subjects on China; therefore it is included in China-related deletion discussion. STSC (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I would concur wholeheartedly that articles about those films would be reasonably considered to be China-related. I cannot concur that this is also true of the biographical article about the director. His work is China-related; he is not. It may, however, be best to agree to disagree on this point. Editors asserting WP:Notability of the article subject should show that it meets the requirements at WP:BIO & WP:CREATIVE. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 13:57, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding any copyright issue in parts of the article, as an editor you should improve it, not just delete the whole article. STSC (talk) 11:21, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete !vote is based on an absence of WP:Notability - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 11:27, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, this debate is not a vote. STSC (talk) 11:29, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Per WP:!VOTE, this discussion should be an act of consensus building. Use of the term of art !vote refers directly to this principle. - Ryk72 'c.s.n.s.' 11:41, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment -Further research shows his documentary work does indeed relate to China, and has received a fair amount of coverage in Chinese media as noted here and here as well as Australia. Osbun himself is in two of these articles, the others discuss only the director Chris D Nebe. ,STSC can you point us to any more sources like these in Chinese media that specifically mention Osbun? The documentary mentioned does appear to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Not sure if these mentions/interviews of Osbun establish his notability, but willing to consider it. ABF99 (talk) 13:50, 15 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The significant coverage from independent sources of Business of Film, Global Times, and That's has already demonstrated Osbun's notability per WP:BASIC. STSC (talk) 09:36, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The Business of Film Cannes market supplement article is paid advertorial, as I stated above. Unfortunately, I cannot find a reliable source that states that, so as to prove it. As for the other articles listed on Monarex website, coverage of their slate of China-related works doesn't mean Osbun is independently notable. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 12:52, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Osbun is notable in his field as a filmmaker and received significant coverage in film-related contents. I don't think Wikipedia would expect him to be "independently notable" like a celebrity. STSC (talk) 13:48, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
We do indeed require the subjects of biographical articles to be independently notable, per WP:BIO, which I encourage you to read, if you haven't done so. Simply having worked on films in some capacity as an employee of Nebe and Monarex is not enough warrant an article, in and of itself. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"People are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject." That's all we are concerned. STSC (talk) 14:40, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, and it remains my view that none of the sources you've cited meets that requirement, for the reasons I've already explained above. Nebe is no doubt notable -- though I daresay his role as a documentarian and/or propagandist for the Chinese regime would become a matter of some contention -- but Osbun is not, in my view. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:00, 16 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —☮JAaron95 Talk 14:11, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
You may have missed something in your search; some of the sources as in the article are more than just "mention". STSC (talk) 17:45, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - the subject has engaged in activities typical of his profession, but nothing that meets WP:CREATIVE criteria.--Rpclod (talk) 18:05, 21 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Osbun's has created well-known feature-length documentary films in China, and particularly Diaoyu Islands: The Truth has won significant critical attention as shown from tOhe sources. These meet the additional criteria for creative professionals. STSC (talk) 03:51, 22 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So you're going to badger every delete !vote? He didn't "create" the film, Nebe did. Osbun had an utterly unremarkable career in reality television work before being hired by Nebe as a staff producer with his company, Monarex. He is not an independently notable producer. If you want to create an article about Nebe, you're welcome to. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 04:27, 25 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Osbun now is a business partner of Nebe, and he was the producer of Diaoyu Islands: The Truth and many other films according to the source: IMDbPro. STSC (talk) 19:40, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I agree with the aforementioned arguments. Osbun has been associated with perhaps notable films, but that doesn't necessarily make him notable. Fame is not necessarily transitive. As stated above, the COI-related editing is also worrying. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 02:28, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - The subject fails WP:BIO and WP:CREATIVE. Inks.LWC (talk) 04:14, 29 August 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/J._J._Osbun&oldid=1136671093"