Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Moss

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 18:09, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Paul Moss

Paul Moss is a Malaysian Idol judge. Source: http://www.malaysianidol.com.my/judges.asp
If Simon Cowell can have his own page, so can Paul Moss. Wikipedia policy states that their differences in fame should not be considered "not notable". Refer to Wikipedia:Notable --Celviano 04:02, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Vanity, not notable --Briangotts 01:46, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable enough. SlimVirgin ^(talk) 03:13, Mar 30, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Sounds notable enough to me. English-language Google hits will certainly be lower than actual, if this guy is mainly famous in Malaysia. — Asbestos | Talk 08:24, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Even given the rather idiosyncratic way that 'vanity' is used here (well, it's more of a dialect I suppose), I can't see any ground for deleting this. I'd bet that he's better known than half the people with articles on Wikipedia (and 90% of the places, companies, etc.). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:13, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - not less notable than a lot of fancruft. Guettarda 16:13, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - The article is informative, and this guy is probably pretty popular in Malaysia. I mean, he's on TV. Bonus Onus 02:50, Apr 4, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - He definitely is a celebrity in Malaysia. He also used to be in a band that I think got a US top 40 hit ("Sensation", IIRC), which should be enough for entry. Dzof 05:44, Apr 6, 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: This was apparently either never listed on vfd or removed out of process, so I'm bringing it to today's page for resolution. —Korath (Talk) 03:11, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
  • This page was on the Vfd pages, someone must have deleted it inappropriately. RickK 04:46, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, agreeing with every keep voter above. Samaritan 05:42, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Uninteresting to me - and no doubt most Wikipedians - but nonetheless clearly notable. - Mustafaa 06:46, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep passes the Pokemon test. Klonimus 07:42, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Question: As you see shortly below, I'm already voting "keep" (though as it happens this person is of no interest whatever to me), but what's this "Pokemon test"? -- Hoary 08:26, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)
    • Basically, it means that its user considers articles on pokemon stupid, and thus argues that any article on a subject he does not consider stupid, should be kept. Note that millions of people in the world can recognize any pokemon at sight, and as such this guy obviously IMHO fails the pokemon test. Also, delete as NN. Radiant_* 09:09, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
      • As Malaysia has a population of nearly twenty-six million people, I'd bet that more adults world-wide would recognise Paul Moss than would recognise a Pokemon character. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 09:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
        • I'd bet there are more pokekids in America and Japan combined, than adults in Malaysia :) Anyway, ok, I'll abstain on this one. Radiant_* 12:50, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, under the bar of notability, idolcruft. Megan1967 08:08, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Tacking on "cruft" to the end of a random word does not make a sound argument for deletion, dear. Mike H 16:50, Apr 14, 2005 (UTC)
    • Funny that. The article is about an Idol judge therefore it can hardly be called random. Since cruft has been an accepted suffix on VfD by many editors for sometime now, I see no reason not to use it. Megan1967 12:54, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
      • It's random in that you just tack cruft to the end of it and hope it's a deletion argument. Mike H 19:05, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)
        • It is but one part of a deletion argument. If you are making an allegation that I just made it up your "assumption" is obviously incorrect. Since another editor has used idolcruft and other editors before this have used it, I am dismissing your claims as nothing more than a personal attack on your part (I dont ever see you criticisng anyone esle for using cruft). Another thing... unless you are a girlfriend of mine dont ever call me "dear". It is considered patronising given the tone of your argument. Megan1967 00:57, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, polevaults over the clothesline of notability, for that presumably large percentage of Malaysians (and perhaps their neighbors) who like this kind of thing. -- Hoary 08:26, 2005 Apr 13 (UTC)
• Keep: Notable. --Fuzzball! (talk) 09:19, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. I don't like any Idol article one bit, but if American judges can have articles Malaysian judges can too. BTW why did nominator put it here if he wants it to be kept? Mgm|^(talk) 09:59, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. As an Idol udge, he makes regular appearances on television. Capitalistroadster 10:25, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as below the bar of notability. Oliver Keenan 19:21, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC) Keep - reconsidered as it is clear that the chap is actually more notable than I originally thought. Oliver Keenan 20:47, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, nn vanity idolcruft. ComCat 06:44, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.