Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Blanchette

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete and kick the ass of meat puppet voters. – Ryan Delaney ^talk 08:18, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Joseph_Blanchette

unimportant vanity page about a newgrounds flash author. 70.22.174.105 04:01, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

• Keep I think he's notable enough to be on here. His site has an Alexa ranking of 65,333. Kushboy 06:20, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete vanity, cv-cruft, not-notable, low alexa rating. Eclipsed 09:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity jamesgibbon 10:30, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. an alexa rating of 65,333 doen't merit an entry, if that is the sole reason for its inclusion --Eliezer | £€åV€ m€ å m€§§åg€ 10:45, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - Anyone can be a newgrounds flash author, doesn't mean they're notable. The best flash, is almost never on Newgrounds. - Hahnchen 14:55, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep How do you figure vanity when he didn't create it? CaptHayfever 16:47, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Wait a sec, 70.22.174.105, Did you just forget to login, or are you on this site exclusively to get this article deleted? CaptHayfever 15:42, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
• Keep He's an extremelely notable figure, I in fact came here to learn more about him csspeedbump 19:20, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

• 64.142.12.122 (talk · contribs)'s 2nd edit. No registered user "csspeedbump". Func( t, c ) 02:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• Delete I reviewed his article, site, and what others say about it on google. He's not notable (yet). Tobycat 06:10, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as vanity. Hall Monitor 23:13, 9 August 2005 (UTC)

• Comment I'm not going to vote on my own page (which I did NOT create or help write), But I think being a well known Flash artist with several popular movies on the worlds most largest Flash portal (which also has a article) is an acceptable reason to have a Wikipedia page. It's not claiming I'm the best or anyhitng like that. It's citing what I've done, and fans might learn a thing or two.
  • Comment The thing is, there are literally thousands of people on Newgrounds, being such a big portal. And the vast vast majority of it is pure pure dredge. A Sample of Joseph's work (That I helped with - Joseph). I don't see anything that lifts this from all the other stuff on Newgrounds, I don't think it's any funnier, original, professional or intelligent then anything else on the portal. - Hahnchen 13:36, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Note - I'm not against Flash or anything, there can be some genuinely good stuff out there. Compare say Joseph Blanchette's work with some other random internet things - EPIC 2014 and Lawcops, by entertainment company Zeppotron. - Hahnchen 13:47, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Hahnchen , You should post a movie that I animated, drew, and wrote, not one I just helped with. This is one I did all by myself: (http://newgrounds.com/portal/view/105053) Just because I'm not the best flash animator ever dosn't mean I can't have a page about me. There are countless movie and TV actors as well, but that dons't stop people form making pages for lesser known ones. Making internet cartoons is very much like being a actor in many respects. The simple fact is I AM popular in the flash comunity, it's just the flash comunity isn't as well known as the acting one. If you want my opinion, I think there should be more entries for popualr flash artists from sites such as Newgrounds. Right now there are only a handful. It's not like its useless, pointless information. Imagine searching for your favorate Flash author on Wiki and getting a page about them. Pretty neat huh? Isn't that the point of Wikipedia? - LegendaryFrog 9:48, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
  • Apologies - I just went to a random site on the external links section and clicked on the top movie. I still don't think that your movies have had enough recognition outside newgrounds, unlike say Xiao Xiao. - Hahnchen 23:55, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

• • Perhaps more people need to do stuff like this for other Flash artists, like CaptHayfever did. It's a excellent resourse. LegendaryFrog 6:15 pm 9 August 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually, that's very much what I was thinking when I did this. It just happened that the only Flash artists I know enough on to write are the Chapmans and LF, and the former was already well-documented here. CaptHayfever 05:11, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

Keep: I think h'es anotable enough person too. He's a good flash artist and is extremely famous on newgrounds as it is.

• Delete not notable CDC (talk) 00:29, 10 August 2005 (UTC)

Keep it : He's a popular guy on the internet -- Guest

• Delete risibly unimportant. Dottore So 20:58, 10 August 2005 (UTC)Dottoreso

• Keep. He's notable enough to be here, and I'm saying this both as a Wikipedian and as a LegendaryFrog fan. -- Alex Nisnevich (talk) 03:07, 11 August 2005 (UTC)

• Weak keep. If we delete this page, then it sounds like we shouldn't be writing articles about Newgrounds Flash authors at all. And then there's little point in even having a Newgrounds category. I figure he's a noteworthy Flash artist. Maybe not as noteworthy as people in other fields, but noteworthy none the less. Optichan 16:40, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

• Weak delete. While I do recognize and appreciate the fellow's submissions, he doesn't have the level of notability and uniqueness that a person such as David Firth would have to merit for an article. Keeping this article would mean a green light for a whole lot of other non-notable Newgrounds artists' articles to be made. ╫ 25 ^ring-a-ding 18:21, 12 August 2005 (UTC) ╫

• Strong keep, I agree with the argument about the credit we give lesser-known actors and I'd like to add that Joseph's early work not only topped the charts on both Newgrounds and Flash Player back when it was first submitted, but it has inspired a generation of Macromedia Flash artists in their work. It seems that every 1 in 3 comedy Flashes, whether in or outside of Newgrounds, revolve around the style established by Blanchette: the sitcom vibe, the character animation and the same type of humour has been echoed in countless submissions, of particular note being those of the The_Super_Flash_Bros/Double Helix team, who have already got several Flashes in the Newgrounds top 50 with their style. I don't feel that it's unreasonable to ask for a bit of recognition to a growing industry. There is obviously an interest in this subject because even if one could accuse the page of being vanity there are still people with an interest in the subject reading and adding to these articles. Besides, there's also an educational aspect with encyclopedias: you don't use them to find things you know all to well, but things you're not sure about, even things you've never even heard of. There's already a big interest, and it can only stand to increase over time.

• Not Only Keep, Expand. I haven't visited Legendary Frog's website but I've viewed many of his Flash pieces - his Alexa rating is irrelevant if he releases on Newgrounds. In fact I'm a little surprised that The Super Flash Bros do not have an article. Their work, including Decline of Videogaming, is arguably more notable than Legendary Frog's. Certainly if the Pedia has articles on the Star Wars Kid and Numa Numa, icons of dubious longevity or cultural relevance, then if enough people search for Blanchette or Dim/JT and generate this kind of talk page, they deserve to keep or gain articles. You can put me down for "Wish I'd found some content when I searched for The Super Flash Bros, and glad at least Legendary Frog got his due." Keep up the good work, Wikiers. Aug. 14 05, Frequent_pedia_user

• Keep Everyone I know has seen at least one of his cartoons. He is one of the most famous (and one of the best by the way) flash animators on the net. I mean if animutations and YTMND can have an article, shouldn't Legendary_Frog have one? I mean he's way more popular than them. Keep it. KEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.