Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Todd Patrick

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 keep. no arguments for deletion after 2 weeks JForget 22:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Todd Patrick[edit]

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

Notability among other problems

"Significant coverage" - this article has 5 refs, 1 is a defunct website, 1 is a pdf stored on a 3 party website. the remaining 3 are less "news" than "profiles". None of the sources really provide any of the information that is in the article, which reads more like a promo for Todd P than an article containing encyclopedic knowledge.

"Reliable" - see the above.

"Sources," - again, see above.

"Independent of the subject" - a minor pass on this one... it's up for debate. I cant imagine what the odd are of one person named todd putting this much effort into a page about another person, who happens to be named todd, without an incentive.

"Presumed" - again, the few press related sources are more easily categorized as "profiles" than "news". I do not think this gets a pass on presumability of worthiness for inclusion.

"Notability is not temporary" history will, i suppose decide. But if (im not wishing it) Todd Patrick wew to dissappear suddenly, there will not be an indelible mark on society for us to look to in memoriam.

"Notability_(people)" - closest level of criteria would be "creative professional" Todd P does not meet this or any other levels of notability. Vinithehat (talk) 03:37, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article claims that various major media outlets have covered this person but doesn't provide links to those articles. I recommend deleting. Jim Heaphy (talk) 04:28, 25 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article in the village voice [1] is not a mention, but a full feature article devoted to him , and for topics like this, that counts as a major NY newspaper. Profiles in major papers establish notability; I see no reason or requirement anywhere that they need to be "news" articles. DGG ( talk ) 05:25, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - Patrick is an influential promoter noted for breaking open the Brooklyn musical scene by use of unorthodox venues - e.g. the well-known concert organizer Todd Patrick(New York Times). Article could be improved. Wwwhatsup (talk) 09:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:04, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep per DGG and Wwwhatsup.--Epeefleche (talk) 10:32, 1 November 2009 (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.