Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dallas Tanner

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 delete. Krimpet (talk) 03:34, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Dallas Tanner

Dallas Tanner (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

promotional; non-notable Tom Harrison Talk 15:03, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

  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}}
  • Delete. Send condolences to Cubby Broccolli's adopted son's business partner. Canuckle 22:20, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Exercise the License to Delete. Minor TV producer, nothing more. --Dhartung | Talk 05:38, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Reliable references from third party reliable sources have been added to verify that subject is notable TV producer and meets Wikipedia guidelines. TV programs ( Destination X Hawaii) produced by subject are broadcast to worldwide broadcasters in many countries including USA indicating worldwide interest of subjects artistic accomplishments
  • Keep. Looks fine to me for keeping. I just watched the programs and see why his programs are airing.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.173.2.158 (talk • contribs) 21:42, 22 May 2007 — User:76.173.2.158 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 14:01, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Note that the previous two "Keep" editors have only contributed to articles about Dallas Tanner and his tv shows. Edison 20:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Does not appear to satisfy WP:BIO. The sources are mostly press releases moved over a press release wire. And a paper in India printed one of them. Others are about the tv show. I would like to see a couple of newspaper/magazine articles in independent and reliable sources satisfying WP:A which provide more information about Dallas Tanner, his history, his philosophy, and his accomplishments, rather than reprinted press releases about the tv shows. Edison 14:59, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Edison; these are "trivial sources" as defined by WP:V.  RGTraynor  16:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep I don't see how this is article can be fathomed as non notable. This person is listed on imdb, has many 3rd party sources, and even produced a worldwide nationally televised special. There is no question as to if this is notable or not. --sumnjim talk with me·changes 19:38, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Easy. What elements of WP:BIO do you believe this fellow fulfills?  RGTraynor  20:34, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

*Strong Keep. The guidlines for creative people per WP state to qualify ":The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews" Well the person Dallas Tanner has created, written and executive produced according to a reliable source on IMDB, 9 episodes of televison into the USA and worldwide. In addition according to the broadcasters sites that air the shows in the United States, more reliable third party information, The Water Channel and America One Television Network, these episodes in fact air, so therefore the subject works are in circulation, also meeeting WP guidlines for creative people. Once again according to the definition on WP the person has in fact played a major role in createing a significant or well know or collective body of work. I would say the project being delivered each week to millions of homes ( granted not everyone may have seen the tv series created by Dallas Tanner...his series Destination X Hawaii is not American Idol) are in deed meeting the guidlines for creating a well know work. Lastly claims that referenced articles can considerred to be non notable, yes there are articles published on press releases and wires, but industry referenced publications also reference the publishing of the series. Beyond that, the mere fact that independent broadcasters own sites ( The Water Channel and America One TV Network) clearly indicate that the subject works are indeed in distribution to millions of tv homes in America each week. You dont need to be the producer of American Idol, to meet the guidelines for notable persons on WP. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MichelleWinkofer (talk • contribs) 20:53, 24 May 2007

  • Comment The IMDB reference in his article was incorrect, coming up with a "Jerry Trent (I)," corrected it. I think the question for me comes down to "significant or well known," and what the limits are. One season of a syndicated show doesn't seem 'well-known' to me, but I'm holding off until I ponder that a bit. LaughingVulcan Laugh With Me / Logical Entries 02:31, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I question that either the "Water channel" or "Channel one" are all that widely viewed. Please provide reliable viewership stats. Also please start adding four tildes after your posts, so we don't have to search through the history each time to see what IP or username you are using. This is at least the second time User:MichelleWinkofer has !voted "Keep." Edison 05:11, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment subjects collection of work ( television series Destination X Hawaii produced by subject) is carried on Water Channel ( just two channels over from Travel Channel on Dish Network and is carried to 21 million homes on USA broadcaster Water Channel. America One is carried to 22 million homes. Total is 43 million homes including on regional affiliates of MyNetwork TV, Regional Sports Networks, Cox Sports. Information is found on third party website sites of actual broadcasters.MichelleWinkofer 08:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment TV series created by subject is also carried on Cox Sports Television each week Cox Sports airs filmmaker Dallas Tanner tv series each week--MichelleWinkofer 08:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Newer TV series created by subject is ranked by independent research firm and rates as top 1/4 of all travel shows broadcast each week in America, beating out rankings of past notable shows including Wild On Subject Dallas Tanner TV show Destination X Hawaii ranked in top 1/4% of all travel shows in America--MichelleWinkofer 08:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Destination X Hawaii TV series, as per WP bio guidlines is a collection of works created by bio subject Dallas Tanner that is significant and rated in top 1/4 of all shows, beating out rankings of some of Travel Channels popular shows and confirmed through independent research [http://research.backchannelmedia.com/genre/Travel/250/2007-05-21 Ranking of Each TV show shows Destination X Hawaii is outpacing many of Travel Channel TV series.--MichelleWinkofer 08:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Destination X Hawaii TV series, as per WP guidlines is a collection of works ( a tv series) that is been pubished as being a new tv series pioneering delivery of tv through mobile phones and was chosen by significant mobile phone comanies to air subjects works through mobile phone distribution throughout United State[* Filmmaker Dallas Tanner has his Destination X Hawaii TV series pioneering for broadcast programs on mobile phone Subject Dallas Tanner is noted in published works as pioneering broadcast of action sports programs through mobile phones worldwide--MichelleWinkofer 08:13, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: In response to the several comments above, first off, notability is not venereal; you don't get to be notable on the sole strength that something with which you're associated might be notable. Secondly, this blizzard of references and links obscures the fact that IMDB credits Tanner with only one show (the Destination X deal), that they all refer to just the one show, and that the mention of Tanner in those references constitutes a "trivial mention" per WP:V, in that the mere "produced by Dallas Tanner" is mentioned without any other information beyond that. None of the reliable sources are, as WP:V requires, about Tanner.
  • Finally, it is probably no coincidence that Google lists a "Michelle Winkofer" as being a PR/marketing assistant for Mr. Tanner. [1]  RGTraynor  15:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm far far far from being an expert with Wiki rules/policies, but I don't see a COI issue with one of his PR people establishing an article on him. As long as it's unbiased and strictly factual, of course. With that being said, I don't find it necessary to even bring it up. This AfD is to determine if the person in question is notable or not. With that being said, I still would like to reiterate that I believe his person passes WP:BIO, however I believe that his passing is debatable. With reading WP:BIO, it states this:
  • The person has been the subject of published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject.
  • If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may need to be cited to establish notability.
  • Trivial coverage of a subject by secondary sources may not be sufficient to establish notability.
  • Once notability is established, primary sources may be used to add content.
This is where the debate comes in. Yes, there are plenty of sources. Are they trivial. I would like to lean towards no because by reading Note#3 under WP:BIO it states Non-triviality is a measure of the depth of content of a published work, and how far removed that content is from a simple directory entry or a mention in passing that does not discuss the subject in detail. A 200-page independent biography of a person that covers that person's life in detail is non-trivial, whereas a birth certificate or a 1-line listing on an election ballot form is not. The existence of a memorial (e.g., a named chair at a university) is not a substitute for depth of content in published work. . Since the sources provided are not simply "one-liners", I would say that they are not trivial, and consider them reliable. In addition, since the key phrase here is Failure to meet these criteria is not conclusive proof that a subject should not be included; however, meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included., it doesn't go one way or the other. Basically...it's a toss up. Since it is a toss up, and he does have an imdb profile, and plenty of sources, AND he is already working on the 2nd season of his TV Show, I believe that he is notable, and the article should be kept. --sumnjim talk with me·changes 17:53, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
Errr ... since you state that you're far from an expert on Wikipedia policies, I commend to you WP:COI. To quote from there, "avoid, or exercise great caution when (1) Editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with, (2) Participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors ..." (emphasis in the original). Ms. Winkhofer not only has a vested interest in defending Mr. Tanner's publicity, she is being paid to do so. Short of Tanner himself chiming in on this AfD, I don't think a greater conflict of interest is possible.
As far as the various sources given in the article, let's review. #1 is a broken link. #2 is the IMDB page, which gives no biographical information beyond a mere list of Destination X credits. #3 doesn't mention him at all. #4 and #5 gives his name only, and is about the show. #6 quotes him about an event he staged, and is entirely about the event. #7 is an adspam bio on a website where people put in their own bios. #8 doesn't mention him at all. #9 is a carbon copy of #6. #10 is a quote from him about the show. There is not a single citation from a reliable, independent, published source. None of the links talk about this fellow at all, nor give so much as a scrap of biographical information. Take a good look at the WP:BIO section you quoted: it requires that the person be the subject of reliable, published sources. This has yet to be the case.  RGTraynor  18:35, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Further ... this from WP:COI: "If ... you are receiving monetary or other benefits or considerations to edit Wikipedia as a representative of an organization (whether directly as an employee or contractor of that organization, or indirectly as an employee or contractor of a firm hired by that organization for public relations purposes) ... then we very strongly encourage you to avoid editing Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that would make your edits non-neutral (biased). Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy states that all articles must represent views fairly and without bias, and conflicts of interest do significantly and negatively affect Wikipedia's ability to fulfill this requirement. If your financially-motivated edits would be non-neutral, do not post them."  RGTraynor  18:52, 25 May 2007 (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.