Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Power (Guinness character)

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 of the debate was strong consensus Keep. Xoloz 15:05, 12 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Power (Guinness character)[edit]

Advertising spam disguised as article. Bhny 16:40, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong keep. Give me a break. Do I work for Guinness? BrianSmithson 16:50, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep - there's nothing wrong with the article - it's as valid as having an article on Ronald McDonald. The original and main contributor is a long-time Wikipedia contributor with a history of good articles about African topics, and no history of promoting Guinness. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 16:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Shouldn't be deleted. The user review for Critical Assignment on IMDb, on the other hand...— unsigned comment by user:205.244.119.2 — CB
  • Speedy keep - this nomination is daft. violet/riga (t) 16:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. Article is well-cited including ample mass media references. Chick Bowen 16:57, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This article is well-presented and cites sources. It was in fact featured on our front page. The character is very well-known in Africa and meets WP:FICT by transcending the work he appears in. Capitalistroadster 17:36, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Well-written and salient. Killdevil 17:47, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep I don't see this as particulary encyclopedia-worthy material, but it appears he is well known in Africa and there is precedent for keeping well know spokespeople. Article is failry well written and has avoided being completely blatent adspeak as well...which isn't a criteria for inclusion, but is nice to see nonetheless.--Isotope23 17:49, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Surely the VfD is a joke? — KayEss | talk 17:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This is frankly the kind of article I expect to find on Wikipedia. You're sure not going to find info on a subject like this on encarta or britannica. Taterbill 18:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I was going to initially suggest merging conservatively to the Guiness article, but they made a bloody movie featuring him, for Christ's sake. Even Ronald McDonald never got his own feature film... Any problems the article has are ones to be solved through further editing. Postdlf 18:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. For precedent, we do have articles on the BMW films. jengod 18:19, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Is someone trying to make a point with this nomination? CarbonCopy 18:30, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Can anyone tell me why this should not be merged into alcohol advertising or maybe merged with some of that and split into a wider article on Guinness campaigns (several of which have been considered influential by the admittedly self-obsessed advertising industry)? A whole article of this size (about the same size as the real Leonard Cheshire) on a fictional character from an advert rather than a work of actual literature seems grossly disproportionate. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 18:31, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • The place to merge would be Guinness, but I don't think that's the appropriate thing to do. Similar articles could be written on other advertising campaigns, surely. I'd think this falls under Wikipedia:Summary style. In other words, merging this into Guinness (or alcohol advertising) would disproportionately discuss one single ad campaign at the expense of others. Instead, I think Guinness should have a summary of the Michael Power campaign but not in the same level of detail (this would also address systemic bias). Incidentally, when I started the article, I thought "Michael Power" was a real person. That's the general attitude in Cameroon, and that's how Guinness is treating this character. People even debate what village he's from. Perhaps this should be made clearer in the article. —BrianSmithson 18:41, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I still think that an article of this length on a fictional character from an advert is grossly disproportionate. But I'd be happy to support an article on Guinness campaigns generally (as I said). I just don't think that articles of this length on ephemeral characters are desirable. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 19:58, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ephemeral? His face is known across an entire continent and he's starred in a feature film. He's been constantly in the public eye for eight years right now. This guy is in many ways less ephemeral than many works of literature. Meelar (talk) 21:08, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, ephemeral. In that the campaign will end, and once it has ended people will forget about him. His lasting impact on humanity might just climb as high as negligible. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] :: AfD? 08:25, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's impossible for us to determine the future, but it seems that people won't forget the character any more than they've forgotten Morris the Cat or "Where's the beef?" or any number of other campaigns. --BrianSmithson 13:07, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Besides, you could just as easily make the "ephemeral" argument for almost any book, movie, CD, TV show, athlete, politician, or event of this year, no? Such, sadly, is the nature of all human endeavor... If the Wikipedians of 2152 want to put this on AfD, I probably won't be around to stop them. =) --Dvyost 13:23, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep. Why is any different than Ronald McDonald? --Dvyost 19:16, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Numerous characters in Wikipedia. Even weirder that this AfD is for an article on "Did you know". - Tεxτurε 19:23, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep I found this article interesting, and it's something I would never have known about if it wasn't a 'Did you know', keep it!
  • Keep For many reasons already articulated by other users. --BDD 20:11, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep This article is culturally important to some people and informative for the rest of us. That's what the wiki is here for. If we were to treat similar articles like this one, then half of the wiki would be deleted. Boothcat4320 21:33, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Its a keep. Rafterman 21:35, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep There is no reason for deletion. The article is very relevant. William Flowers 22:06, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I can't really see any reason to delete this article at all. It seems pretty relevent. Jeff Silvers 22:56, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep, also suggest this should be considered as a featured article after peer review Bwithh 23:01, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. As a journalist I tried to write about this film-as-advertising and found it hard to get information. This is a useful resource. TimHarford 16:45, 8 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep The article is historical. With it I can learn about something that happened elsewhere in the world. From it I wonder if Western "image marketing" is new to Africa. I heard of someone easily quitting smoking once they notice how the marketing affects them. So the article is significant.
  • Keep. I never heard of this character before, but the article is well-written and well-cited; maintaining this article will help counter systemic bias. --Metropolitan90 03:34, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Naturally most of the info cited is from Guiness, I don't imagine there are a lot of other organizations out there producing literature about their campaign. This article is very informative and obviously culturally relavent to large parts of Africa. Where's the beef? is another example of advertising campaigns gaining cultural relevance. I think they're interesting studies in consumerism and have a place here on Wikipedia. Zytsef 09:01, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep Not only is it a well-written article, the Michael Power phenomenon is an important African cultural development - a media-created character that has popularity and resonance across the continent. Important to have an article as a web reference on the topic, rather than just corporate references.Ethanz 14:47, 9 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. --Westernriddell 07:18, 10 November 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I voted on this, so I don't want to close it, but you know anyone, not just an admin, can close an obvious speedy keep like this. Feel free. . . Chick Bowen 03:18, 11 November 2005 (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/Michael_Power_(Guinness_character)&oldid=1138077808"