Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikhail Tank (2nd nomination)

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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:12, 11 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Mikhail Tank[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Barely meets notability requirements if at all--holds an obscure record and directed a short film. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 01:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It's clear he's a very minor artist of little significance or influence. It pains me to learn how Guinness is having titles for such ridiculous category to push the sale of its publication. Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 02:19, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Ohconfucious should adopt a slightly more cynical attitude toward the Guiness book, whose publishing venture started as a way to make money off people's drive to win bar bets. Not exactly the most idealistic of ventures. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:47, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise for being under the mistaken impression that Guinness was a serious publication. --Ohconfucius ^¡digame! 08:32, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non notable per WP:VERIFY. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 11:45, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - While the graphical prowess is impressive, let's not make this any more complicated than it needs to be for newcomers to AfD. This is not a vote, after all, it's the arguments that matter. Graphics only divert attention from the meat of the page and have the potential of starting an "arms race" between Keep and Delete voters to keep up. Carrite (talk) 14:33, 3 August 2011 (UTC) Last edit: Carrite (talk) 14:34, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:04, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 20:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notice: This AfD has been mentioned at AN/I (link). Sven Manguard Wha? 04:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence in reliable secondary sources that the topic is sufficiently notable for inclusion on WP. The Guiness record is, of course, pure silliness. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 05:44, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable --Steven J. Anderson (talk) 06:02, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm going to go against the obvious flow on this one. Profiles present on IMDB, and on allmusic.com. WP:GOOGLETEST returns over 19,000 hits. The artist's rantings and antics at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Wikipedia.27s_oversights_of_swift_deletion is highly objectionable, but an artist being objectionable isn't a reason to delete the article on that person. --Hammersoft (talk) 13:16, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete there are seven cited sources in the article:

1-a trivial mention (23 words total) that Tank had a show @ Edinburgh Fringe, 2009
2-story about Guinness record from newslite.tv, a site that probably doesn't pass WP:RS (it's own tagline is "barely qualifies as news")
3-Tank is listed as playing the character "Russian Guard" on one episode of the TV series Alias
4-another slightly less trivial mention of Tank's Edinburgh Fringe 2009 show
5-a trivial mention (23 words, again) that Tank had a show @ Edinburgh Fringe 2009
6-primary source indicating acceptance of Tank's 5 minute short film My Pretty Pony to Oldenburg International Film Festival
7-Patch.com profile of Tank. For those that don't know, patch.com stories are essentially local news & features (on the order of a community newspaper story) commonly drawn from freelancers that often have no journalism training.

Discounting the redundancies, the assertion of WP:BIO notability rests upon the Guinness record, the show at Edinburgh Fringe, a movie shown at a seemingly non-notable film festival, and what's in the IMDB profile. The Guinness record is a throwaway record and received throwaway coverage. The Edinburgh Fringe show was one of over 2000 and doesn't appear to have been specifically reviewed, merely mentioned as existing. Reviews of My Pretty Pony are not to be found. IMDB lists only bit parts or work in productions of no note.

In total, I do not think this passes WP:BIO for lack of substantive coverage in multiple sources. I would be willing to reevaluate my opinion if further sources are found. — Scientizzle 14:31, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Agree with the above, non-notable, apparently (almost totally) undocumented in reliable secondary sources (of which IMDb is not one, and on his page there it states "IMDb mini-biography by: from official site") this person appears to be web-savvy and self-promoting. I have never seen a Google search return so many pages of blogs, e-tailers, lyrics sites and other user-generated stuff without one decent article from an RS (went 5 pages deep). As an indicator of his prowess in getting his name all over the web this is taken from his mini-bio: You can find Mikhail on LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook, Wikipedia, MySpace, Elixio, IMDb, Amazon, iTunes, Vimeo. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 15:28, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Scientizzle's useful summary is pretty comprehensive but to add to that, WP:FILMS explicitly mentions IMDB as more of a resource than a source in its notability guide. I don't believe it's ever been regarded as reliable. Per Captain Screebo, the fact that a significant number of Google hits doesn't return much of value tends to confirm the subject's lack of notability ("examining the types of hit arising ... often does provide useful information related to notability", from Wikipedia:GOOGLETEST#Search_engine_tests_and_Wikipedia_policies). I see nothing that would get over the bar of WP:BIO. EyeSerene^talk 16:22, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note This article was created by Stevenlevine1 (talk · contribs). As can be seen from press releases hosted by Tank's website, this name matches that of Tank apparent PR firm[1]. I will inform Stevenlevine1 about WP:COI. — Scientizzle 16:57, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good find! CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 17:09, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response For what it's worth, I've actually already communicated with Steven, and he was very reasonable and professional about this AfD. He understands the processes here and is willing to work with them. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 17:37, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Though this article is part of a conscious PR effort by the subject, it is still reliably sourced and contains valuable encyclopedic information about a not-so-well-known artist. — Yk ʏк yƙ talk ~ contrib 18:50, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the sources cited are not sufficient to demonstrate that the subject satisfies WP:GNG per Scientizzle, nor is there any indication that the subject passes a subject-specific notability guideline. To counter the Keep opinions: raw numbers of google hits means very little indeed, and the total number of unique hits is under 800, "contains valuable encyclopedic information" is not a valid argument either, as it boils down to WP:ITSUSEFUL. Hut 8.5 19:48, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak keep~~ If this news source is reliable, I think the phrase "Mikhail Tank has secured his place in history" indicates notability. Perhaps others can examine the source and make a determination. There may be other sources deeper in the google hits. I also noticed that a lot of radio station sites have the same blurb about him mentioning his Guinness record. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 20:03, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Torchiest, I will assume good faith, but are you serious? Have you read WP:RS about what constitutes a reliable source? It's not because the site says "news" that it's a news organisation. Click on the contact section and you will see the contact address is a gmail account. Oh, and this text is a press release, probably written by the above PR agent, and then farmed out to a million sites. Proof, your source and another random webpage with exactly the same text. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 20:42, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete That's fine. Like I said, I wasn't sure about it, and I was getting google fatigue. :) I wanted to make a good faith effort to find sources though. Thanks for checking. Changing my !vote. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 20:47, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

No probs, hope you don't mind I refactored your comment so the Delete appeared in the appropriate place, I was having page-loading stress earlier too, especially with your source as there was so much celebrity junk and ad banners on it. CaptainScreebo ^Parley! 22:06, 4 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - The sources provided are fleeting and far too brief to satisfy the notability guidelines, does not come within a whiff of any of the author/entertainer/etc... ones. Consider salting the title once deleted, given the aggression and borderline harassment/trolling by the creator as well. Tarc (talk) 00:04, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete while a few reliable sources seem to exist, they do not appear to cover this person's life in any significant detail as one would expect to pass the minimum notability standards. --Jayron32 03:48, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I didn't see any sources on both Google and Yahoo that could help this article biographically. SwisterTwister talk 20:39, 8 August 2011 (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.