Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Callan

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. --May the Force be with you! Shreshth91 11:24, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Callan

  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}}
Jonathan Callan (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Incomplete nomination by 69.244.98.171 (talk · contribs). His comment on Talk:Jonathan Callan was: "the comment by the author of the article above is signed Roboliberal. A quick google search of the keyword Roboliberal reveals this site, which tends to indicate that Roboliberal is Jonathan Callan, the subject of this article, and is attempting to write an autobiographical article while fooling the Wiki community into thinking he's just a fanboy." Procedural nomination, no opinion yet. cab 05:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Speedy Delete I would say that the information contained within the article does not sufficiently show notability. Additionally, the page is self-advertisement and therefore makes it an obvious candidate for speedy deletion. Pablothegreat85 07:00, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete, fails WP:BIO, WP:ATT, NN, possible WP:COI. This bit of inflated puffery talks big about his award-winning TV series (in other words, the pilot put on his college's in-house TV station), his award-winning screenplay (in other words, the award given out by the community theater that hosted the play), and his second award-winning screenplay (5th place in a competition that has ten Google hits [1]). Roboliberal seems to have a skewed notion of what constitutes "significant body of well-known work," "notable awards" or "regarded as important figure by peers." Wikipedia policy has in mind a slightly larger field than the theater community in Ithaca, NY. When Mr. Callan's acclaim comes from the New York Times theater reviewer instead of from his college newspaper, and his awards from the Tony nominators rather than the local theater, that will merit notice. RGTraynor 17:29, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • No Delete Respectfully, I disagree on both counts for proposed deletion. Mr. Callan is a writer whom I work with on several IC-TV shows and is of extreme notability in the areas in which he writes. Certainly, the accusation that it is somehow self-advertisement is baseless and without proof. I have worked with the author but am not even a close friend, so in neither case does the article fit the criteria for auto-biography as laid out in the wiikipedia guidelines. After all, IC-TV itself (our campus TV station) has a wiki entry, so why not an entry on one of its more popular writers?
The case comes down to one of notability. I have fufilled at least three out of five of the notability criteria: recieved notable awards (cited), regarded as an important figure by peers (cited), has created a significant body of well-known work (cited). I would welcome suggestions on how to demonstrate the other two criteria, but there are honestly few authors that have statues or monuements of them built, anyway. And no one cites a problem with *their* wiki entries. The lack of a secondary source (such as a non-fiction book about the author's work) is one that I could find numerous wiki-entries on authors to support in contrary. Many articles on semi-popular modern authors fail to meet this requirement. I would like to remove the tag for speedy deletion, honestly. I welcome other opinions however.

-Roboliberal

  • Delete, but I'm going on WP:N and a side order of WP:LOCAL. It's my opinion that Roboliberal needs to also assert why Mr. Callan is notable beyond local theater stuff. In short, can we get more sources that assert better notability? If so, I will change my mind. --Dennisthe2 18:14, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - A wee bit of digging. I've no beef with the notability of the ICTV site, seeing as it has won numerous awards [2] and serves 26,000 homes on Time Warner basic cable in the county in which Ithaca is located. By the bye, that awards list? Callan does not appear. The broadest possible search of ICTV's website [3] has only four hits for Callan, one as being on staff in the spring of last year, three pertaining to the one episode that he wrote. A search on the Cornell Daily Sun's website doesn't turn up any hits, despite the citation of an article purportedly about the subject [4]. RGTraynor 20:18, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • So we have a primary source that shows that he's employed (or has been) at ICTV, but no secondary. --Dennisthe2 17:00, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
Correct, although I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of ICTV's website. He's listed as a generic "staff" person in the spring semester of '06. RGTraynor 17:14, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Strongly Object to DeletionI object to the notion that the subject in question is not notable because he hasn't had a write up in the New York Times. There are plenty of television and comics writers who have never once had a write-up by either the New York Times or any other national paper who warrant (and have) wikipedia pages. Likewise, I will point everyone to the "notability page" for Wikipedia requirements which clearly spells out that fame IS NOT equivalent to notability. Mr. Callan is a well-known author in the Ithaca and Priceton communities and I believe I have established notability in this regard through numerous citations and articles. An inability to find a few of these clearly cited articles doing cursory google searches is not the fault of the subject. The world exists beyond the internet. And I'm not at all sure The Cornell Daily Sun makes an archive of even a majority of its articles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roboliberal (talk • contribs) 21:48, 19 March 2007 (UTC).— username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp [Only edits by this user are on the article in question and this AfD.] (UTC). RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Do Not Delete I worked with Jon Callan on the IC-TV show Beyond and several other shows. He's practically a household name in Ithaca, NY. I can't understand some of these complaints. They are absurd. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by MikeGarland87 (talk • contribs) 21:51, 19 March 2007 (UTC).— username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp [This post is user's first Wikipedia activity.] (UTC).RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • No Delete Jon Callan is a well-known author in the Ithaca area. His writing is followed practically with a cult devotion on our campus. He's a cool guy. How all he's done does not fit the requirements for notability has hardly been made clear here. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DennisThapa (talk • contribs) 21:55, 19 March 2007 (UTC).— username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp [This post is user's first Wikipedia activity.] (UTC). RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • No Delete Jon Callan holds a certain recognizable status above the typical college writer; he has several verifiable credits to his name. Callan has obviously just started his career, as evidenced by his works in progress, and I forsee this article being expanded in the next few months. At Ithaca College and the larger Ithaca area, Callan holds notability for his personality and writing. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 86.135.76.93 (talk) 22:23, 19 March 2007 (UTC). — username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp [This post is user's first Wikipedia activity.] (UTC).RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Do Not DeleteHe's well known here in upstate NY. I've seen him in the Ithacan and the Cornell Daily Sun multiple times. N8dogg74 22:28, 19 March 2007 (UTC)n8dogg74 — username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp [This post is user's first Wikipedia activity.] (UTC). RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Do Not Delete These objections make no sense. I have worked as an actress on several IC-TV productions, and can safely say that Jon Callan is a highly respected and established writer at Ithaca College. He has also received awards and acclaim outside the college for his work. How does he not qualify as "notable"? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vmayne (talk • contribs) 22:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC). — username (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at UTC timestamp [This post is user's first Wikipedia activity.] (UTC). RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment: Given the rather clumsy sequential nature of all these first-time users, perhaps Roboliberal would find the provisions of WP:SOCK useful reading. RGTraynor 22:54, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Do Not Delete I would like to mention that in addition to his notoriety in upstate New York, Jon Callan is also well known in central New Jersey. His short films and theater work are held in high regard by many authorities in the area, including Princeton's renowned McCarter Theater.192.152.243.19 22:59, 19 March 2007 (UTC)anonymous concerned
  • Strong Delete. Google position is confused by "Jonathan Callan (artist)" (different person) ... Fails WP:BIO - references are not strong; article is over-egged. Springnuts 23:25, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete But he's a "household name in Ithaca, NY"! These sockpuppet votes made me laugh though - nice try! Croxley 23:27, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete nice sock-puppeting, but you're fooling no one. Fails WP:NOTE. --Haemo 23:42, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
  • No Delete This will be my last post here. I find this entire argument ridiculous. Accusations of "sock-puppeting" most of all. You asked for proof of the subject's notabality, I have, in my mind, more than supplied it. Others agree with my positions, and wikipedia is meant to be a community foremost based on strength of argument in terms of inclusion, not percieved social standing. Whether or not those featured here are first time users are irrelevant. They have continued in making the case that the subject of the article is *INDEED* quite notable. Certainly, I have enough respect for wikipedia to know its not a vote. But I have registered my opinion. The facts and the citations more than speak for themselves. To disclude a writer of medium popularity who speaks to a large audience from an internet encyclopedia that has a substantially huge entry on LEGENDS OF THE HIDDEN TEMPLE is indeed insane. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Roboliberal (talk • contribs) 00:11, 20 March 2007 (UTC).
  • Comment You've already voted TWICE before as Roboliberal. Once at 13:41, and once at 21:48. And now again at 00:11. You must have become confused by all the other sockpuppetry in between. Croxley 02:01, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment What you don't seem to understand is that we need proof. Real proof - not comments from people who may or may not exist and who may or may not of heard of the subject. We simply cannot take your word for it. If he is really a household name, if he is held in high regard by those in the know, then that proof would exist. Bring it- real sources that anybody in the world can examine and say "yep - this guy is notable", and this argument will disappear. - CosmicPenguin (Talk) 02:15, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Looks like we have another NUGGET Posse --Ron Ritzman 02:20, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete schoolboy and "writer of local acclaim". Nothing but LOCAL media coverage and LOCAL student awards, thus fails to pass WP:BIO. Ohconfucius 08:19, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Leaning towards delete because the article appeasr to describe someone notable within the SF-media field, yet it is a name I have never seen (TtBoMR) in the media material I "watch", here in the UK. I suspect that a writer "famous" in a small village in England (but not known in the US or Guam) would earn the same disdain, if I wrote him/her up for Wiki. -- 62.25.109.196 08:58, 20 March 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.