Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jasper's Riddle

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. Despite the walls of text produced by those wishing to keep, no clear evidence of notability has been presented. Vanamonde (Talk) 16:24, 15 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Jasper's Riddle[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Jasper's Riddle (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This living person is not notable, and many of the sources cited are unreliable and/or self-published. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 22:42, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Before I removed them, there were many other sources which were blatant literal press releases from Zeickner - see the talk page of the article for my explanation on that. The article has existed for half a year now, so there has been time to add sources if they existed. It was initially created by an apparent corporate account, and has been facing huge amounts of edit warring when editors point out the problems with the article. I think most of the publicity around this artist is simple astroturfing - he isn't signed to a label according to his YouTube, and has very little engagement on his social media platforms for someone who apparently gets this much press.

The part about the Benin bronzes is the only real verifiable, notable thing there, and I don't think that section alone warrants Zeickner a whole article. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 22:48, 7 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Sources are either not independent or lack depth of coverage on the individual. MrsSnoozyTurtle 07:41, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep MrsSnoozyTurtle @User talk:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith already removed the troubling references regarding his music career. Personally his work for Benin Bronzes meets notability requirement and is very important to a lot of people, especially Nigerians to justify this article. Dude was featured on primetime TV news NTA, CGTN, Reuters, The Times, You dont get to decide its not notable enough because you said so. As it stands, all the sources are real and notable. It would only be re-added if it gets deleted. The warring seems resolved as the article was improved. I recommend removal of AFD notices/template. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factsaboutnigeria (talk • contribs) 08:51, 8 November 2021 (UTC) — Factsaboutnigeria (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • If your argument is that the Benin bronzes thing alone makes him notable, I would say WP:BLP1E contradicts that. Sorry, but I don't see how that would justify him a full article, and certainly not one named "Jasper's Riddle." How important it is to people in a certain country doesn't really matter if there aren't sources. If it's important, stuff like this event can go on the Benin bronzes page, if it fits there.
It would only be re-added if it gets deleted. That's not how deletion works. If it gets deleted and an account starts trying to recreate it, they'll just get blocked and the article salted. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 14:56, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Also 'No grounds for deletion' isn't the right format, iirc. You should probably change the bold text in your post to 'Keep' if you want your vote to count. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 14:57, 8 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Sorry but its extremely ignorant of you to say the news concerning the Benin bronzes doesnt make him notable. People have done less with articles on wikipedia, dont let arrogance belittle your credibility as an editor. Also as pointed out already, there are numerous sources which you continue to ignore just to justify you warring with editors that dont agree with you. You also put blatantly false information such as saying contributor has close links to the artist which is not true and baseless. You then posted on my talk page saying I'm a corporate account based on a company's twitter username based in LA I never heard of. You accused an IP username of "Self promotion" however when I checked that IP it shows the same IP banned for the same "self promotion" for a number of completely different people, so how can they self promoting multiple people?
You complained about the name yet didnt bother to change it despite making loads of edits yourself, which seems a little petty from an editor's point of view. If the guy is legitimately known by a professional name, performance name or otherwise, there's no problem with it imho. Other editors can chip in here.
If its deleted wrongly, it can be reinstated. You dont get to delete articles you dont personally like using incorrect claims. Literally all of the issues you mentioned when nominating it were about sources concerning his music career and were already resolved. There's no valid grounds for deletion. Your only actual argument is that you personally dont think its notable according to your tastes despite numerous sources and notable references saying otherwise in news coverage about the guy. It was literally a historic accomplishment. Try not to be unbiased or take things personal. Its becoming less about the article and more about your power trip. If you have useful edits to make, make them so the edit warring can stop. What other valid improvements do you recommend for the article?
Also note that you're linking material which literally contradicts your argument. WP:BLP1E refers to 'Events' not creations. Like I said, try to be unbiased, Can we give it a rest? --User:Afrorocktv
  • KeepOriginal arguments for nomination no longer stands as the all flagged sources were since removed. There are literally no unreliable sources on this article. Original sources she claimed were self published related to his music career and were removed. My bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afrorocktv
— Afrorocktv (talk • (contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Claims this living person is not notable yet sources and internationally celebrated achievements says otherwise. Original arguments for nomination no longer stands as the all flagged sources were since removed. There are literally no unreliable sources on this article. Original sources she claimed were self published related to his music career and were removed. My bad. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afrorocktv
I'd appreciate it if you'd stop the personal attacks about me being "arrogant", but I'll try to address your arguments anyway.

Sorry but its extremely ignorant of you to say the news concerning the Benin bronzes doesnt make him notable. People have done less with articles on wikipedia, dont let arrogance belittle your credibility as an editor.

I'm citing WP:BLP1E. Nothing you said there contradicted the policy. You might want to read that policy page more closely.

RE: Actually I think you better read the policy. The articles arent just about the event, and his notability is not based on the unveiling itself but the thing which was unveiled. This is starting to get ridiculous and seem like you have an agenda at play for the baseless arguments. Sorry for using the term 'arrogant' because it seems you just want to win an argument falsely rather than respect wikipedia's policies. Also its rich of you claiming personal attack when you're the one attacking my page, and linking someone else's twitter account on my talk page. @User:MrsSnoozyTurtle Can you chip in here? It is 100% false to cite WP:BLP1E to refer to this article about a living person being based on an event when the subject matter's notability is not for the event. The event took place BECAUSE of the notability of the work, and there are loads of news coverage and stories which arent even about the event. He is credited for the creation of the work not the unveiling of it. I agree with the original edits you made but not this false deletion discussion. @User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Please accept that arguments against this notability is totally invalid. Actually as it stands, not a single issue persists in the article from the problems originally flagged about his music career which are gone from the article. So what exactly is the discussion about?

Personally I am removing the original message template from the article which is refers to issues that are no longer present on the article. Kindly verify @User:MrsSnoozyTurtle

You also put blatantly false information such as saying contributor has close links to the artist which is not true and baseless.

Look, I'll try to make this clear as possible. I did not add that template in the first place. I re-added it after an IP account - one that was banned for self-promotion - removed it without explanation. You keep saying that I put that there, but I didn't put it there in the first place.

RE: User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Sorry, I'v tagged the original person now.

Your only actual argument is that you personally dont think its notable

And so do the other editors here. That's how Wikipedia works.

RE: I'm also one of the other editors here and I dont agree with you. Also no other editor has agreed with you concerning the Benin bronzes not being notable because you wrongly claimed it was as single event warranting the article which is blatantly false.

You accused an IP username of "Self promotion" however when I checked that IP it shows the same IP banned for the same "self promotion"...

Exactly my point.
User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Please if you're going to respond to a quote, kindly QUOTE exactly what I said in full. Its a deceptive practice to leave out half of the sentence as if you're trying to sway the conversation.
This is the full quote you didnt want to add :

You accused an IP username of "Self promotion" however when I checked that IP it shows the same IP banned for the same "self promotion" for a number of completely different people, so how can they self promoting multiple people?" This statement refers to the fact that you wrongly banned someone's IP based on what seemed to be an incorrect assumption. It is clear a 'self promoter' cannot be multiple people. This seems to be a case of the same IP being assigned to different people, which Wikipedia itself acknowledges is a common occurrence.

You complained about the name yet didnt bother to change it despite making loads of edits yourself, which seems a little petty from an editor's point of view.

It is not my responsibility to clean up a page that I consider unfit for inclusion on the site anyway. You're the one who wants to keep the page, not me.

RE: @User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Like I said, there's nothing in Wikipedia policy against using a person's known professional name / stage name when its clear they're the same person.

WP:BLP1E refers to 'Events' not creations.

I'm trying to assume good faith, but this is ridiculous and I can't believe I have to explain this. When the media covers the subject unveiling his new sculpture, that is an event. The rules don't magically stop applying when there's a creative work involved. I agree that the Benin bronzes thing is important socially, and support the subject's cause, but this is a website with rules, and I'm going to follow the rules. This kind of thing just doesn't belong on this specific article, on this specific website. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 03:51, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
User:HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Actually I cant believe I have to explain this to you. It is 100% false to cite WP:BLP1E to refer to this article about a living person being based on an event when the subject matter's notability is not for the event. The event took place BECAUSE of the notability of the work, and there are loads of news coverage and stories which arent even about the event. He is credited for the creation of the work not the unveiling of it. I agree with the original edits you made but not this false deletion discussion.

Also can you explain why you keep vandalising my signature? I'v contributed to loads of other articles but I happen to be spending more time than usual on defending this article since its my first article and you insist of needlessly fighting about it.

Afrorocktv: I'm not sure what you mean about vandalising your signature, since you haven't signed various posts here. Also, what are the "loads of other articles" that you have contributed to please? Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 11:30, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
MrsSnoozyTurtle:: There was vandalism to my signature which I removed. I'v edited articles about Anita Ellis, voice dubbing and loads of others I cant remember of the top of my head. You can also check and see me there. Also are you going to respond to the points I tagged you in and help close this discussion or is it suddenly about my whether I have as much right as you to edit on wikipedia (News flash, I do) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Afrorocktv (talk • contribs)
That makes even less sense. I looked at your contribution history, and there are only two other articles you’ve edited, and voice dubbing is not one of them. Do you mean you did those edits on another account or something? —HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 16:32, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No I meant I wrote about voice acting inside Anita ellis's own article. Its not every day I find interesting topics to write about. How am I supposed to increase my contribution if I'm not allowed to edit articles or any contribution I make is challenged due to lack of contribution history? @HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith and @MrsSnoozyTurtle - User:Afrorocktv
I'm not "challenging" anything. I added a template marking that you do not edit outside of this subject. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 18:14, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Afrorocktv: Can you stop editing my posts? I don’t have the time to give a full response right now, but you keep inserting replies to my statements inside my posts, making the whole thing hard to read. That’s against talk page guidelines and I’ve already requested you stop. I have removed your annotation in the middle of my quote, but I’d appreciate if you could move your replies into one big chunk underneath my message, like MrsSnoozyTurtle and I have been doing this whole time. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 16:21, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another note: in this diff, User:Afrorocktv is editing someone else's post, adding "Keep" to their comment. That's not allowed. WP:TPG isn't totally clear on what I should do here - does a more experienced editor know what to do in this situation? --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 17:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I editted it after I saw that you had posted that "no grounds for deletion" was incorrect and telling them to edit it to say "keep" instead for the vote to count? Sorry if it broke the rules you can undo the edit but its not like I was changing their vote or something. Yikes - User:Afrorocktv

HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Claims this living person is not notable yet sources and internationally celebrated achievements says otherwise. Original arguments for nomination no longer stands as the all flagged sources were since removed. There are literally no unreliable sources on this article. Original sources she claimed were self published related to his music career and were removed. My bad.

This article isn't lacking WP:SIGCOV Can you thoroughly review the sources and explain why creating a historic artefact unveiled in a nationally and internationally broadcast event impacting a major social issue isn't notable for many people who it matters to? @User:WaddlesJP13
@Factsaboutnigeria: Firstly, I checked the references prior to participating here. It's how I got my conclusion that this person lacks significant coverage, because there are no sources (books, news articles, etc.) available that sufficiently cover this person. Yes, there are mentions, but nothing that solely is focused on the person himself. Secondly, please, for the sake of ease in communication, remember to sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~). Between you and Afrorocktv both leaving walls of text and forgetting to sign them, it's impossible to tell who is saying what, therefore making it harder for people to reply to you. Also, to reply to someone, use {{replyto|(username)}} which activates the ping (@). Waddles 🗩 🖉 20:29, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]


signed by User:Factsaboutnigeria Many people would seriously disagree with your statement that its not notable for wikipedia despite being notable for national and international news.

Dear Cody User:Clpo13 could you please review the discussion and assist in consensus? It appears the only reason for categorizing for deletion was WP:BLP1E which is not applicable. The items discussed in the article do meet WP:SIGCOV. I recommend the removal of tags on the article as they no longer apply to the article. Those voting for deletion are doing so against wikipedia policy with unjustified factors- signed by User:Factsaboutnigeria — Preceding undated comment added 17:03, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

_________

To all the editors User:MrsSnoozyTurtle, HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith, User:Afrorocktv, User:WaddlesJP13 Can we decide for good, I dont think it warrants such arguments. If you decide to delete it I will accept that if you believe it cant be improved further. If not, please make edits to improve the article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factsaboutnigeria (talk • contribs)

We've all already voted tho --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 18:15, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith Can you review the edits made to the article? You voted based on saying it was about a single event which isn't the case? Can you review the references? -User:Factsaboutnigeria — Preceding undated comment added 18:28, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Not much to review - you just removed some stuff and made it slightly smaller. It has a lot of very nice sources for the single event about the bronzes, but - again - that's just the one event. As for the other section, it cites an extremely brief mention on Pulse.NG, then a bunch of routine coverage from the venues he performed at. Still maintaining my vote to Delete. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 19:57, 9 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith: @WaddlesJP13: Honestly this discussion is frustrating. I sincerely dont understand why you repeatedly refuse to correct yourself that this article is about a notable item and the notable person is its creator. Its not about the event itself which the sources confirm, you either didnt read them or for whatever reason falsely stated its referring just to an event. Either way I wont bother with this argument anymore. There are plenty of articles on wikipedia of world record title holders (single events) and notable people based on significant few or single accomplishments with 3 or 4 references. There are 14 high quality references here. The subject of the article is the creator of a notable work with all sources verifying that. No need to argue further, delete the article if you like. If more sources pop up I will add it later. Signed Factsaboutnigeria (talk) 18:32, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The word "event" is used very loosely in the guidelines. The creation of an object is an event. "One event", "one creation" - potato, potahto. Still doesn't fulfill WP requirements for notability, sorry. Since this topic seems to mean a lot to you, I would recommend copying relevant information into the Benin bronzes page, as it does seem like it could work there. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 18:41, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The creation of an object is an event" Could you please reference this definition in the policy? There's absolutely nowhere on wikipedia stating this.

Please read [[1]] states If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate. The event involved even the residing government. It is clear and obvious that the event is very notable and the subject's role was significant. The sources cover more than a single event (despite which the event is significant alone to justify the article). Mentioned in the sources is the plaque and its unveiling, the new Ahiamwen guild, and its relation to British Museum so I would say the subject is notable for more than one event. Please verify @Clpo13: @WaddlesJP13: @HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith: @MrsSnoozyTurtle: and vote fairly. I only think its interesting for it to be referenceable on Wikipedia Factsaboutnigeria (talk)

@Factsaboutnigeria: A large event that is enough to make someone notable would usually be the foundation of a company, organization, political entity like a city or country, etc, alongside the presence of WP:SIGCOV, not just brief mentions like those shown here. I don't see the notability. Maybe others, who are not affiliated with creating this article, do. I have made my decision and no longer want to be pinged day after day in this discussion that is harder than it needs to be. Waddles 🗩 🖉 02:28, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, since most people voted lets remove the article for now. Who will be deleting it? EDIT can you #REDIRECT page so the link still exists? Since @HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith: suggested it belongs there Benin_Bronzes#Reception This article should redirect to the article about the event Factsaboutnigeria (talk) 06:58, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think it should be a redirect. Pleas read WP:AFD for more info. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 14:05, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • To clarify - I think that only because Zeickner himself isn't really the most important part of the story, and "Jasper's Riddle" was not the name he was known by when he did the stuff with the bronzes. By the way, if you want to change your proposal from "Keep" to "Redirect", you should do that by adding "Redirect" in bold to your comment. --HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 16:16, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Since the article was created about Jasper's Riddle, I'v edited the article to remove anything not associated with Jasper's Riddle. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Factsaboutnigeria (talk • contribs) 17:52, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:GNG / WP:SIGCOV, the reliable independent sources in the article from BBC and Reuters don't even mention Jasper's Riddle. Hughesdarren (talk) 08:18, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails notably guidelines as above. I recommend reading the whole argument above as a dramatic reading for amateur theatre groups if you want to entertain yourself doktorb wordsdeeds 09:06, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete This page is muddled and poorly sourced. It essentially leads with the idea that the living person is a musician, but is supported by sources about Benin bronzes, most of which do not name the individual, in connection with a large bronze black the person made as a student, which, as one other editor put it, likely fails WP:BLP1E, and, circling back to the original point, is pretty unconnected with the music industry material. Iskandar323 (talk) 09:16, 14 November 2021 (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/Jasper%27s_Riddle&oldid=1055391082"