Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Tom

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 Speedy delete. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 08:44, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jason Tom

Jason Tom (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)
  • Delete: Autobiography about non-notable beatbox person. Fails WP:MUSIC by a large stretch. Made his YouTube debut last year (along with 80 zillion other people, no?). I speedied once but it was fleshed out so I wanted to give it a fair chance here. —Wknight94 (talk) 12:18, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep First of all, the article that was originally posted and was deleted by someone on this page was not an "autobiography" and the YouTube info was simply a way to familiarize with people who may not be aware. Non-notable beatbox person? I'm sorry that you feel that way, but there are notable accomplishments that was not posted up as of yet. Wikipedia is about sharing information with others and building a source together. An online encyclopedia. There was more details that was edited out so others may contribute in the future, so if you feel you cannot add anything at the moment, don't feel discouraged in the future. Isn't that what wikipedia is all about? Building a source of information together.Jasontom 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No persuasive expression of notability. --Dweller 12:43, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep That's because this wikipedia page was getting tags that it was an autobiography when it isn't. A lot of content was taken off to encourage others in the future to contribute. Currently there is very little information to grativate from, be patient, it just begun! Give it time and space to breathe.Jasontom 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless the article can be bought up to standards i.a.w. WP:MUSIC or WP:BIO by end of this AfD Alf photoman 12:58, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I'll look into that since from what I understand Wikipedia has many terms to follow. I truly appreciate your feedback!Jasontom 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete since when does a "debut on youtube" constitute any sort of notability? too local for wikipedia. --Tainter 15:34, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep A lot of stuff originally up were edited out because there seems to be members here that feel that what is written is an autobiography when it wasn't. Information is simply shared with Wikipedia members, but a member wanted to speedily delete the info. The YouTube debut is far from a notable accomplishment, it was merely a way to introduce people like yourself who may be unfamiliar. Thank you for the feedback.Jasontom 00:23, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete' YouTubecruft, per WP:MUSIC, WP:COI and WP:V. JuJube 02:36, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • What?? You did not make yourself clear! Jasontom 06:34, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I don't follow the argument that this isn't an autobiography, by the way. A large portion of the edits on the article were by an editor whose user name matches the name of the subject. The article will have to go unless WP:BIO/WP:MUSIC can be met. janejellyroll 05:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Hello Jane Jelly Roll, argument? Who said this is an argument? This is a discussion taking place. There are friends and supporters that have provided information for this article. Is it illegal for supporters to present and share such information? I thought Wikipedia was about sharing information together and I don't mean that by means of creating personal websites or whatnot. Would you prefer another username be used to prevent confusion for editing purposes for this particular Wikipedia article? That could be done in a blink of an eye. Problem solved!
    I believe much unneccesary attention have been given toward this article, but I thank you all for your input and whatnot. I will say this again, if anyone feel that he or she can contribute to this article than that would be greatly appreciated! It's nice that many of you want this article to be deleted, but that is due to a great misunderstanding. Jasontom 06:35, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
    I don't mean argument in the sense of "fight." I mean it in the sense that this discussion consists of people presenting their "arguments" for or against deletion. It certainly isn't illegal for friends and supporters to present and share information, but Wikipedia might not be the place to do so. There are policies to consider such as WP:COI and WP:NPOV and WP:N. Are you the subject or not? Your user name makes it appear as if you are and if I misunderstood that, then I apologize. Usually though, editors don't take the names of people other than themselves. You say that there is a "great misunderstanding." What is the misunderstanding exactly? If you could demonstrate how this article meets Wikipedia policies for notability, then it would help a great deal. janejellyroll 06:42, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Well I'm sure Jane Jelly Roll isn't exactly your real name or people with aliases such as wknight, etc. It's just an alias. For example, how many Michael Jackson supporters have aliases with "Michael Jackson" or "King of Pop?" Countless! It isn't against Wikipedias' terms for parties involved with the party that the article is about to edit or post either. It is limited though due to the NPOV terms. That is understandable. The article was already as neutral as can be, but obviously from reading this discussion here people want more info than what was vaguely presented prior. So there is definitely great interest for this article to grow contrary to the "Delete" requests. But to stop any more confusion, you may change this username to JanesNumberOneBuckethead. I would gladly have your guidance since I am relatively new to editing Wikipedias. If you wish to assist me in improving this article, I would appreciate it! It definitely deserves a chance! Trust me and thanks! Jasontom 07:29, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
    I have struck out all but one keep !vote from Jasontom. Please, make your !vote once and only once.—Ryūlóng (竜龍) 08:37, 31 January 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.