Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/12oz Prophet

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 no consensus Evidence was given that this meets WP:WEB, I suggest citing it clearly in the article to avoid future deletion though. W.marsh 21:41, 7 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 12oz Prophet

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

I'm sure the members of 12oz Prophet may get a kick out of this article, but it doesn't belong on Wikipedia. This is not Encyclopedia Dramatica. Zaratoosa 14:01, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

  • KEEP We at 12oz have agreed to make this a serious article, not just "something to get a kick out of." Like I said before, wikipedia is about free information, and this is a notable website in the graffiti world. --Jontimbo
  • Perhaps 12oz's hits should be noted? What is the argument that this is non-notable? Because its not important to you? Graffiti is regarded nation-wide as an important issue, and this site is a hub of the graffiti artists. Where else can you talk to graffiti writers? The streets of new york are covered in paint, but do you ever get to learn anything about what that person's life is like, or who they are, or anything about the artform? No, but this site allows you to. Wikipedia is about free information, and this article provides information about a website that is a core form of communication in a subculture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jontimbo (talk • contribs)
  • It should be noted that there is a post on their forum about this discussion now, so we should prepare for an influx of anon "votes" =/. --Wafulz 17:19, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • It should also be noted that it says in the thread to add to the wiki to make it more legit, and to argue why this should not be deleted. Not to add "VOTES" but to make the wiki better, stop making everything seem like the users of that site are making it a joke. -Grits
  • Delete It was me who prod'd this back in July. It's still an article about a non-notable website that fails WP:WEB. Cheekily, the front page of the site has a link straight back to this article along side a link to their myspace. Wikipedia is not a web host. -- IslaySolomon 14:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEPYeah, the worlds largest and best run graffiti website, which has been up for 8 years, has over 55,000 members, 60,000 threads with a combined 2.65 MILLION posts inside those threads, really needs WIKIPEDIA for adspace. NON-NOTABLE website, maybe in your community, but in the graffiti world, this is the ONLY website. Backed by some of the BIGGEST artists in the graffiti community. At least do a little research into things before you describe something as "non-notable". So the worlds biggest graffiti website, which used to be one of the worlds biggest graffiti magazines, which has published one of the greatest graffiti books, which is backed by some of the worlds most famous graffiti artists, isn't notable enough? Grits —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.119.195.76 (talk • contribs) 16:20, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

    User has no contributions outside AfD. User also signed using another's account. --Wafulz

    This part was bullshit, I don't feel like making an account, I've added TONS to different AofDs regarding graffiti articles. I don't have a static IP, so no wonder my IP hasn't contributed anywhere else. I do my part, thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.119.195.76 (talk • contribs) 2006-09-28 16:51:52

    • Art Crimes is Alexa ranked at 25,919, while 12oz Prophet is ranked at 374,883. Upon quick browsing, Art Crimes appears to be the comprehensive source for graffiti information. To my knowledge Art Crimes does not have its own entry, so I don't see how the site in question deserves one.Zaratoosa 16:52, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
      • "If article X then article Y." is a fallacious argument. The article on Art Crimes may simply have not yet been written. Our criteria for web sites are WP:WEB, Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:No original research. The correct discussion to be having is whether there exist any sources, independent of the web site itself, to back up anything at all in the article. Remember the mantra: "Sources! Sources! Sources!". Reading, citing, and evaluating sources is the proper study of encyclopaedists. Uncle G 01:04, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. An Alexa ranking in the mid 300,000s, 68 unique links, the vast majority of which are actually not unique (ie ten links coming from one forum) or notable, no news mentions, no major awards, and an article that is completely uninformative- their headquarters is in "teh worldz" and they had net income of over a billion dollars, despite having mods with a "take-no-shit" attitude. Sorry, but this misses WP:WEB by miles. --Wafulz 16:25, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Changed to neutral pending source verification. --Wafulz 23:51, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Definitely keep, as mentioned 12ozprophet.com has been an ongoing effort of various minds throughout the world. These include some of the worlds most reknown graffiti artists and is a forum which allows participation from the inexperienced, to the masters of style. As far as not having any news mentions or no credibility as a source, the website in recent months has been highlighted by several news broadcasts. I will ad that with 55,000+ registered members, perhaps to you it is unoticeable, however to the community it is aimed for it is a premier source of information. yes artcrimes is the first website to feature graffiti as its central point, but why should 12oz prophet, a site which started 2 years after, be penalized and not be featured here?189.165.46.229 17:16, 28 September 2006 (UTC)Ginger Bread Man
    • Comment Do you have any reliable sources to back up your claims? Also, I have no idea what you mean about it being two years since "be penilized". --Wafulz 17:21, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
      • Comment I don't see what you don't understand about it, makes sense to me. Why should 12oz be penalized because it started two years after Artcrimes, which by the way, has little to no actual content, just alot of pictures and dead links. No thanks. As far as news articles, it seems weird that you would notice the wikipedia article being announced so more people could come on here and fix it, but not notice, http://www.10news.com/news/9858635/detail.html , apparently the news thinks 12oz is a popular site. But how reliable are they? Grits
        • Comment. For establishing notability, we usually require multiple non-trivial notable mentions, with "notable" being very well-known or national news, or at least non-local news. --Wafulz 18:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Okay. From the top:

    Of course Wikipedia is not a webhost. Clearly 12oz Prophet is strong enough to stand on its own. Yes, there is a link from the main page, so what? There are links to many other sites.

    Yes, artcrimes would appear to be “the comprehensive source for graffiti information” with a cursory look. That is simply because it is the most well-known. I am having a hard time understanding this philosophy that 12oz doesn’t deserve its own article just because artcrimes doesn’t have one. That’s like saying Lili St. Cyr wouldn’t deserve an article if Bettie Paige didn’t have one. Also, if you go to the artcrimes page, and look at their list of best graffiti sites, guess who’s first? 12oz Prophet. Albeit, it is an alphabetical list, but the fact that 12oz is listed should say something.

    Regardless of whether or not you would consider 12oz a “reliable source”, the statistics kept as a function of the message board software should be sufficient enough. (Or, see for yourself on the main page of the forum.)

    THE WRITERS FORUM - THE GRAFFITI DESTINATION Statistics

    Threads: 60,148, Posts: 2,654,921, Members: 55,104, Active Members: 13,037

    Welcome to our newest member, michaeldouglasmc

    Lili St Cynical 18:17, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

    • A reliable source has to be independent and notable. Also, statistics don't usually merit inclusion unless they're particularly outstanding and leading in their field. --Wafulz 18:33, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
      • It wasn't clear which claims you were asking him to back up. I included those simply to affirm his comments about how busy the site is.Lili St Cynical 18:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I'd also like to add that 12ozProphet has many more attributes that Art Crimes does not, simply due to the nature of it being a forum. Aside from the pictures, there are instructional threads and topics concerning safety, discussion of legal issues and individual rights, a political and current events forum, and a forum for non-graffiti-related art. I agree that the current article is a little lacking, but I propose that Wiki give us a week to flesh it out a bit more and clean up a bit.(did anyone read this?) Because truth be told, it really is an awesome site, and does deserve to have an articleLili St Cynical 18:40, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
    It will be at least 5 days before an admin decides whether the article should be deleted. If you think a clean-up will help, go for it. I suggest that you stress the site's roots as a magazine. Zaratoosa 00:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete Terrible writing and supposed market worth of $1.5 billion aside, this web site is non-notable, as stated above. -- Kicking222 19:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong delete To the 12oz Prophet users who are arguing to keep the article, please read WP:WEB and tell us how your site meets the notability guidelines set in that article, because from what I can see, the article makes no attempt to show how it does. NeoChaosX [talk | contribs] 19:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • "This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper and magazine articles, books,..." I will end it right here. Since 12ozprophet, actually started out as a graffiti magazine (a well sought out one, in fact one of the most infamous at it's time) I will exclude that one, and just tell you that it's been in SEVERAL graffiti magazines over the years, not limited to casual passes or ads, but full articles dedicated to the history, present, and future of 12ozprophet. Not only that, but has been in books, including but not limited to Also Known As. One of the best graffiti books to come out in recent years. So if being in several well known magazines, and books, not to mention PUBLISHING books, isn't notable then what is? Ask anyone within the community that we are in, and 12oz is not only the most well known site, but also the best run. Delete it if you want, me or someone I know will have a new one up the same day. -Grits —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.119.195.76 (talk • contribs) 2006-09-28 20:01:40
    • If there are several, make sure they satisfy Wikipedia:Verifiability (and by extension Wikipedia:Reliable sources) and put them in the article. (Note that print is fine—it doesn't have to be links.) Talking about them here without delivering the goods is meaningless. Also note that once the community has decided to delete an article, recreating it only results in it being deleted on-sight, so, no, there won't suddently be a new article if the decision is delete. (Mind, there is a process to request undeletion given new evidence of suitability, but recreating the article is not it.) — Saxifrage ✎ 01:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as a failure to meet the criteria of WP:WEB. A net income of $1.4billion... man I want a piece of that!--Gay Cdn (talk) (email) (Contr.) 20:06, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • I have to admit when I read the article, I laughed. It's funny, and in a way, it's accurate. We do discuss a lot of things on there- at times, I share anecodes about my life and am 100% aware of the fact that I am leaving myself open to all kinds of responses as a result of putting myself out there in the public eye. However, based on the guidelines of Wikipedia, it's not a good article. I interpret those guidelines to be something along the lines of neutrality and/or unbiased reporting, and it fails on both counts. I don't think it should be deleted, though. If anything, it should be allowed to remain, and edited by some of the moderators to include the history of the site (what was mentioned was cursory at best), what the policies of the forum are and how those policies came about, future plans for the site, its intended purpose, etc. I've been posting on the board for almost four years, and am still a little unclear on some of these points. Hope this helps. -shai hulud —Preceding unsigned comment added by CoolCalmChris (talk • contribs) 2006-09-28 21:47:00 — CoolCalmChris (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • Note - nomination removed from the log by 69.241.126.114 - Yomanganitalk 23:55, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per above. — Saxifrage ✎ 01:03, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Vote changed to neutral: there are at least claims to notability sufficient for WP:WEB now. — Saxifrage ✎ 23:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP- not only does it have a coprihensive archive of graffiti related topics, it is one of the most current archives out on the net, as people can continually add new information and photos. It can be viewed as a magazine, that has grown online and which continues to grow with up to date pictures, events, shows, information, stories and products etc. It is in a sense, the equivalent of Wikipedia but for the graffiti community all around the world. I dont even see what the big deal is with keeping it. Its not like the site needs exposure on here to get membership and interest. It is well known among those who are into this kind of thing, and having it on here merely recognizes the soceital shift into online information and on going growth of online communities, that were once non existant. It is not on here to advertise anything, and it is a documentation of an online resource for those in the graffiti community. —Preceding unsigned comment added by LUMOS (talk • contribs) — LUMOS (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
    • This would be where a decent understanding of the point of Wikipedia would come in handy. We don't do original documentation, we only collect and reference existing documentation. Provide documentation that says all the things that you're arguing are true, and the article will likely stay. Don't provide documentation, and it will likely get deleted. — Saxifrage ✎ 01:25, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
  • It seems to me the nerds who continually come back here just to argue their point aren't going to listen anyway. I don't know where your Alexis rating gets your numbers, but it's nowhere near the 20million hits a month that the site is actually getting. I've already stated that it's been mentioned in several magazines, newspaper articles, and books. Not to mention, that it at one time WAS it's own graffiti magazine. I don't know how you expect me to reference this, since it's not online (there is a world outside of the internet, it uses paper) short of scanning it, and hosting it, and linking you to the picture. I've already surpased the terms of WP:WEB so why is there still an argument? -Grits —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.119.195.76 (talk • contribs) 2006-09-29 04:12:24
    • You've already been asked to cite those magazines, newspaper articles, and books, and told that mere vague assertions that they exist are not enough. Uncle G 09:51, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Criteria for WP:WEB: (representing a partial list ranging from the last 18 months)
    1. "Milk Magazine" Issue 267; August 2006
    2. "Lowdown Magazine" Issue 52; April 2006
    3. "Streetwear Today Magazine" Issue 14; March 2005
    4. "Print Magazine" Unsavory Characters, by Caleb Neelon; Jan/Feb 2006
    5. "Untitled - Documents of Street Culture" Andreas Hesse, Steven Vogel, Sven Fortmann, Katharina Kemmler, Martin Magielka, Henrik Kurschner, Akiko Watanabe; Published by Kark-Heinz Muller & Katharina Kemmler; 2006
    6. "Graffiti Brasil" by Lost Art, Caleb Neelon, Tristan Manco; Published by Thames & Hudson; 2005
    7. "Freight Train Graffiti" by Roger Gastman, Darin Rowland, Ian Sattler, Published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc.; 2006
    8. "Supreme Quality" by Roger Gastman; Published by Gingko Press; 2005 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.90.35.7 (talk • contribs) .
  • Keep, as per list of verifiable reliable sources that assert it's notability.--duncan 16:56, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP, 12oz prophet is an online community worthy of recognition, it is an asset to graffiti in these modern technological times —Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.89.171.13 (talk • contribs)
  • KEEP "Wikipedia:Notability (web)

Criteria for web content

Web-specific content[3] is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria:

1. The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself."

Here are some, far from all, of the most recent publications that 12oz has been featured in:

"Milk Magazine" Issue 267; August 2006

"Lowdown Magazine" Issue 52; April 2006

"Streetwear Today Magazine" Issue 14; March 2005

"Print Magazine" Unsavory Characters, by Caleb Neelon; Jan/Feb 2006

"Untitled - Documents of Street Culture" Andreas Hesse, Steven Vogel, Sven Fortmann, Katharina Kemmler, Martin Magielka, Henrik Kurschner, Akiko Watanabe; Published by Kark-Heinz Muller & Katharina Kemmler; 2006

"Graffiti Brasil" by Lost Art, Caleb Neelon, Tristan Manco; Published by Thames & Hudson; 2005

"Freight Train Graffiti" by Roger Gastman, Darin Rowland, Ian Sattler, Published by Harry N. Abrams, Inc.; 2006

"Supreme Quality" by Roger Gastman; Published by Gingko Press; 2005

  • Keep, If you were to delete this Wiki, you would be denying a whole Sub-culture of recognition, and furthermore, if you really believe that the Wiki is needed for advertisment then maybe you should explore the posts on the threads to find someone who really cares as to whether or not people find this website or not, as you will be hardpressed to do so. Qwerty. 68.109.124.108 20:15, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. If at all possible, could you provide some links to the articles, or provide information on the readership of some magazines? I say this because an article that talks entirely about graffiti and has one sentence on the website is not as important as an article devoted entirely to the website. --Wafulz 03:33, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
  • KEEP: I have been a member of the 12oz prophet community for 6 years now. This site contains relevant information on a sub-culture that countless thousands of people are a part of. I have learned from 120z., made friends., and read daily information on world happenings to this day.

75.39.157.222 23:11, 2 October 2006 (UTC)Mr. BojanglesUser's sole contribution --Wafulz 18:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

  • As wonderful as this is, this doesn't address concerns about reliable, verifiable sources. --Wafulz 18:24, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. A significant website in the graffiti subculture. Themindset 20:59, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment We've provided more than enough to meet WP:WEB. We've provided the names of magazines that have whole articles on either 12ozprophet, 4thw, or AKA. We're not going to provide links to the articles, because they are in PAPER form. Back before the internet, we used paper goods to distribute information. These are not ONLINE magazines. We've provided WAY more than we had to. And you're continuing this because you lost the argument and don't want to admit it. There sources are easily varifiable. Go out and buy one of any of those magazines, And that's just within the last 18 months. Being the first to feature the Os Gemeos twins, should be BEYOND enough notability. As if changing how people look at graff zines wasn't enough. Give this up man, we've provided more than enough info for you, the article is changed. Give it up. -Grits —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 67.121.114.241 (talk • contribs) .
    Chill a bit. Relax. Edit some typos, do a little zen article-gardening. It's all cool: This isn't a vote that gets tallied numerically at the end. The arguments people make are what matters. Given evidence of notability, everyone who says (including myself, above) to delete for non-notability get ignored for being wrong when the final decision comes down. — Saxifrage ✎ 23:36, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Or, you know, pay attention. I just want to see the articles. I'm neutral to the discussion at this point. Also, if you hadn't noticed, I did a full copyedit of the article a few days ago because I felt it would be kept anyway. --Wafulz 04:59, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Neutral my ass, all you've done is argue everything even with all your little articles met. Don't start bullshitting now.-grits—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.25.182.143 (talk • contribs)
    • Please be civil. I don't know what else I can say to you. I already struck out my opinion, and I went through a copyedit, and I did both of these well in advance of my comment. Provided I could get one excerpt or link I would change it to a keep right away- the same that I do with every other discussion like this. It won't matter to the closing admin because all arguments for deletion have been made obsolete at this point anyway. --Wafulz 13:43, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
Here's an excerpt for you, Graffiti Brasil p.18. "McGee told 12 Oz Prophet magazine editor Alen Benedikt/Raven about the Brazilian scene, and in 1997 he and Sonik travelled to Sao Paulo to visit Os Gemeos. The resulting 1998 issue of 12 Oz Prophet introduced the Brazilian scene to graffiti writers throughout North America and Europe, which catapulted Sao Paulo to the top of many writers' destination wish lists." Issue 6 is listed in the book's bibliography. This excerpt gives us a reliable verified source that mentions 12 Oz. And the quote itself also affirms just how notable it is; it was read across North America and Europe, and had widespread influence in making Brazil a desirable destination. --duncan 07:03, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
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.