Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jay the Joke

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 Redirect and merge to Jay Mariotti

[edit] Jay the Joke

Was nominated for speedy deletion as a non-notable website. This isn't a criterion for speedy deletion and nominating articles using that as a criterion doesn't make it one (subtle hint: stop nominating, or change the criterion; stop making the life of deleting admins hard). So, here we are: slow delete for being a non-notable blog-cum-website. ➨ ЯEDVERS 23:10, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

  • I, for one, find this to be notable. Jaythejoke is incredibly popular in Chicago and has been featured by multiple news sources. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Chgojoey (talk • contribs) .
    • Our criteria are not based upon the subjective opinions of Wikipedia editors. The criteria for web sites are laid out in WP:WEB. Uncle G 13:22, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • To the Wikipedia Administrators:

    If I understand the reason behind nominating my August 11 entry for speedy deletion, one or more people have objected to the entry on the grounds that the subject of the entry, the Jay the Joke website, is a “non-notable” website.

    In response, please note that as of the present moment, the Wikipedia encyclopedia now boasts a total of 1,316,282 articles in English (i.e., Monday, August 14, at 15:50 GMT).

    Note moreover Wikipedia’s fundamental open-source commitment—a “free encyclopedia,” which “anyone can edit.”

    In order for someone to raise a reasonable and fair objection to my proposed addition to Wikipedia’s 1,316,282 articles, I am afraid that the subject’s lack of noteworthiness in another person’s eyes is simply not sufficient. After all, facts are one thing. But who is to have the power to determine noteworthiness?

    Instead, in all fairness, and in the spirit of Wikipedia’s core commitment, for an objection to lead to deletion, the objector would have to show that the substance of the proposed entry is false—and not only false merely, but false in some non-trivial sense.

    Therefore, unless the person or persons who raised the “non-notable” objection can meet these last conditions, there clearly is no good reason to prevent my proposed entry from becoming a part of this encyclopedia’s growing family of entries.

    Thanks. David Peterson 13:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC) (Chicago)

  • Redirect and merge into Jay Mariotti. While Jay the Joke doesn't fail WP:WEB (I could read one tribune article and the chicago reader article, the third wanted registration so should likely be removed), if one were to clean up the article per WP:MOS it would be stubby. However, it could easily be made into a well referenced section on Jay Mariotti. Syrthiss 18:55, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Friends: One of the more revealing features of the Wikipedia entry for Jay Mariotti is the way the entry already is framed according to incidents and around themes that are of major importance to Mariotti's enemies. In other words, overall, the Wikipedia entry for Jay Mariotti as it now exists reads more like a smear of its ostensible subject matter (Mariotti) than it does an entry about the same. Notice, for example, that out of its ten references, no less than nine are datelined June 16, 2006 or later; and the last, posted by Eric Zorn to the Chicago Tribune’s website on October 28, 2005, is nothing but an attack on Mariotti. Thus when you discuss merging an entry about a website the avowed purpose of which is “uniting Cubs fans and Sox fans through a common hatred of Jay Mariotti” (Jay the Joke) into an extant Wikipedia entry which already betrays very much the same purpose, I have my doubts. Thanks. David Peterson 21:11, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
  • For the record: I want it understood that I regard the extensive revisions to my proposed Wikipedia entry for ‘Jay the Joke’, introduced by Anonymous User "64.50.38.194" (19:27, 17 August 2006), to be serious falsifications of the original. The purpose of the original entry was to describe a smear campaign organized against one particular individual, which, ultimately, has expanded to provide a license for hate speech and Internet intimidation more generally. However, the net effect of the revisions introduced by "64.50.38.194" has been to transform an entry about hate speech into what now reads as an entry about a sincere project on the part of a couple of individuals “to unite sports fans throughout the city [Chicago],” with “Critics of the blog” simply “point[ing] to the posts in the comments section as being excessively abusive.” In short, the revisions constitute an historical fabrication. Thanks. David Peterson 14:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC) (Chicago)
  • Friends: That is to say, what the Wikipedia guidelines describe under the rubric ‘Wikipedia:Guide_to_deletion#Sockpuppeting_is_not_to_be_tolerated Sockpuppeting’ and similar offenses. Thanks. David Peterson 15:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC) (Chicago)
  • If you believe you can expand on Hate speech, the Hate speech entry might be the proper place to do it. If there is to be a Jay the Joke site, it should explain the history of the blog, the stated mission of the blog, the blog's authors and news the blog has made. It gained a little bit of notoriety because of Guillen's slur vs. Mariotti and Mariotti's subsequent vacation. It gained a little more notoriety because of your role in publicizing the juvenile comments section. You really shouldn't be posting an article for a topic you are so closely involved with. Thanks... "Mr. 64..."
  • Also, how is it a fabrication that critics don't like the abusive nature of the comments section? Isn't that your complaint?
 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 10:05, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, nonnotable blog. User:Angr 15:06, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge — to Jay Mariotti Also, see WP:OWN. JChap2007 18:34, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete A three month old blog? Non notable to the extreme, even if the target is notable. Resolute 05:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Merge to Jay Mariotti. It's noteworthy in Mariotti's career, but I doubt this merits its own entry. Shermerville
  • Merge this. It's an editing matter. --Tony Sidaway 19:45, 21 August 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.