Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Thomas Dunn

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, discounting single purpose-accounts. --Sam Blanning(talk) 15:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Thomas Dunn

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether an article is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads (or socks).

You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing!
Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}.

Vanity page, non-notable subject Tsimshatsui 00:55, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

— Possible single purpose account: Tsimshatsui (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
  • Delete: Furthermore, he adds himself to other pages. Maximumlobster 03:49, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete: Usually I'm a bit suspicious about a new user filing an AFD as their first edit ever since it usually implies they're already familiar with WP policies and have gained experience under a different account. However, I'm quite concerned about the notability of this person considering that his IMDb mini-biography is written by "Anonymous" and all contributions to this article have been either from IP addresses or User:Dodgem4s which smells strongly of a Wikipedia:Autobiography violation not to mention Wikipedia:Vanity per nom. A Google search for ("Michael thomas dunn" -wikipedia) which returns 1,430 hits. The first five pages returns either his own website or directory listings. I'm now filing separate AFDs for all his studio and movies. Fails: Wikipedia:Reliable sources test. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  05:21, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Wikipedia:Assume good faith. I, for one, was anonymous for a long time before I created an account. Anonymity is not an indicator of bad faith. Uncle G 10:27, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
      • I assure you, my first edit under a username was not made with negative intentions. After a long time of anonymity, Michael Thomas Dunn's article drove me to get more involved after he listed himself under "famous alumni" at UCF. I only want Wikipedia to be a better resource for all and I look forward to contributing more in the future. Tsimshatsui 02:45, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete: Not sufficiently notable. Legis 10:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable actor. *drew 11:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: This is not a mainstream actor, granted. Just because he acts in independent short films doesn't mean he isn't an actor. He is just a regional one. I'm seen in 2 films at the Florida Film Festival over the past couple of years. He is also listed on All Movie Guide, Internet Movie Database, New York Times, MSN movies and quite of few others. — Possible single purpose account: Paulag1248 (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic. 17:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep: There is nothing in the Wikipedia agreements that state that actors of the stage or of independent films can not be listed on wiki. This is probably a personal attack against said actor. Several links to major commercial movie sites are included on this page. These complaints have no basis. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.170.7.60 (talk • contribs) 18:07, 21 August 2006.
  • Don't Delete: Wikipedia needs more content on Independent Film -- Not less. I see nothing objectionable on the pages listed on the AFD. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 132.170.48.94 (talk • contribs) .
  • Keep: Just another person hating on UCF and its growin success. Probably a UF or FSU fanboy.
— Possible single purpose account: Jennyangel97 (talk • contribs) has made little or no other contributions outside this topic.
  • Do Not Delete: Since people are upset about that these submissions were made mostly by one user -- I plan to make some additions and contributions to these pages listed for an AFD. He is a hometown success story -- His work for the film community has been instrumental in attracting more film projects to the area. GoldenKnight07 00:05, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per well documented nom and per Maximumlobster. It is particularly distasteful when people like Michael Thomas Dunn spam Wikipedia. GBYork 12:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well, I don't know about all this. It seems that both sides are spamming to me. But I don't think that any rules are being broken and don't see what would be gained from deletion. Honestly, Wiki lists porn stars -- many of which are pretty obscure, too. Whatever. Don't like a show, change the channel. Don't like a web site, don't read it.

I don't recall reading anything on Wiki that stated that I couldn't invite my friends to partipate in discussions. I have many contributions over the past year to Wiki (I am no where near a single user account) -- a large portion were the articles mentioned on the AFD, but I have also contributed to content regarding Florida history, theme parks, automobiles, video games, heavy trucks and other topics I am familar with. I will make any changes that are suggested. But so far, no suggestions have been made. I will break it down: A. These Pages meet Wiki's Reliable Sources: I have cited several newspaper articles (New York Times/Orlando Business Journal/Central Florida Future) confirm the info. B. Wiki's Non-Notable Subject: the Subject is also listed on many other entertainment web sites. C. "Delete per well documented nom" - Not a single user has once tried to rebute any of the facts I have listed. DodgeM4S

Reply You might check WP:SPAM, Article #3 to make sure you are not violating that. GBYork 14:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Reply Thank you for pointing out the SPAM policy and I just re-read it-- but inviting friends and local newsgroup readers does not appear to violate the Wiki policy in any way. I think this debate is definitely useful -- and I'm looking to improve the quality of all the content I have submitted, not just the ones listed in the APD. Another contribution I made to a theme park was deemed a little too POV/opinionated -- so I fixed it. All I ask is you make constructive suggestions that I can use to remedy any of the content. I've put a lot of effort in all the content submitted -- and think it has made wikipedia a more complete source of information.... which has been my goal all along. I do wish I registered earlier, as I had made many earlier contributions as anonymous -- that is the reason my credited contributions seem lopsided. But I've been a contributor for about a year and a half now. By any chance, Is there a concensus of what exactly needs fixing? I'd be happy make these corrections. -DodgeM4S
  • Comment: No, there isn't any policy against inviting friends and coworkers -- they'll just be more likely ignored per the Wikipedia:Single purpose account guideline by the administrator making the final decision. So far I've only seen one source that passes the Wikipedia:Reliable source test, the Orlando Business Journal and if you provide at least two more article in the same vein, I'd be willing to change my vote altogether. I don't count the New York Times and VH1 links because they're not articles but movie synopsises that can be self-submitted to the All Movie Guide. Look, come back in a year or two's time and recreate the article if Dunn produces a film that wins a major film festival award or is distributed nation-wide. My philosophy when it comes to notability is that one is only truly notable when other people are writing about them, not when they write about themselves or have their coworkers or friends do it for them. We have to take a hard-line stance on notability because everything in an encyclopedia has to be verifiable. For example, how could any reader ever determine if Dunn really "owns a collection of performance cars and classic automobiles"? How can I accept that anything written in the Trivia section is true or made up? I can't -- because no 3rd parties are constantly providing new information that we can use to scrutinise the article's contents with. We have to take your word alone -- and that's simply unacceptable in an encyclopedia. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  18:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Reply: Dunn's feature film [Alone and Restless] will be released on DVD nationwide in February. DodgeM4S
  • Reply: Since you raised concerns over the ability to verify the trivia information, I have deleted the section. The bio comes from an official site, so I'd imagine its accurate. DodgeM4S
  • Comment Perhaps you could userfy the article -- get it out of the Wikipedia namespace -- and keep it as a user page until you get it up to snuff. That would stop the single purpose account people, because as User:Netsnipe says, they will be discounted anyway and the fact your article draws that type to vote ends up making your article look bad rather than helping. GBYork 19:19, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: userfy is Wikipedia slang for moving an article to userspace (which means it's no longer an article in an encyclopedia, but a personal page / article in progress). To do so, copy and paste the original article into a new page called User:Dodgem4s/original_article_name. This means that even if this article is deleted, you can still continue to work on it and when you believe that the article will pass a future AFD review, you are free to move it back into the encyclopedia proper. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  19:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well if its more newspaper sources you need -- that really isn't a problem. They just aren't online any more (most newspapers delete their content after a few months). But I've saved lots of newspaper articles regarding the local film industry. I'm going to UCF to join the film school, but I just a sophomore still (not in the film school yet). I'd be happy to photocopy any of them and mail them to any of the editors. I've been collecting news clipping since 1998 when the Blair Witch Project came out. I've got a ton of stuff on local feature films like Blair Witch, Flora Plum, The Bros., Jurrassic Park III, Alone and Restless, Larry The Cable Guy: Health Inspector, Olive Juice, etc. I've also got articles for the TV shows: Carpocolypse, Sheena, From Earth to the Moon and the Pet Psychic. I know I've got at least 2 articles on Alone and Restless, I think I got one on Black Zone, too. I can Userfy if necessary -- but it would be a lot of work to Userfy all the submissions that are flagged. Which ones would I need to userfy and which ones already meet Wiki guidelines? As for the trivia section -- its almost all cut and pasted off of IMDb. The bio, I cut and pasted off the official site. Perhaps I should cut and paste the content to another Wiki article I've been working on Florida Film Industry. Suggestions????? DodgeM4S

I would like to point out that WP: VAIN states this: "an article about a little-known musician or band should preferably not be by the musician, a member, or a manager, roadie, groupie, etc. Articles on very little-known subjects are often of debatable value for our readers, so if you write a new article on one it is particularly important to express the facts in a neutral way and as much as possible to cite sources that are credible, neutral, and independent." This policy does not expressly prohibit content on subjects that are considered little-known -- and how many "indie" filmmakers are considered well-known? I think his occupation puts him at a unfair disadvantage. But as per wiki guidelines, even if he is deemed little-known by an administrator that still does not prohibit the content of the above articles The articles are very credible, neutral and independent. ...and any passages to the contrary I would be happy to delete. DodgeM4S

I would also like to argue on the grounds WP: PORN BIO -- Why is it so much more difficult for an independent film maker to be considered relavent to Wikipedia than a porn star? Does a Porn Star need 3-4 third party newspaper interviews (since movie synopsis don't count) to be deemed notable and how many porn stars actually have been flagged for the lack of these newspaper articles? DodgeM4S

  • Comment: Every time you've edited this page, it becomes a total mess (e.g. [2]) with your comments always right between my comment and signature, your links are always invalid, and you totally screw up the formatting of everyone else's comments. Please learn to use preview. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  20:22, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Does not seem to meet criteria for notability.--Runcorn 19:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Reply As I has posted earlier, I gave several examples that all above articles meet the Wikipedia notability articles. I also politely request that you re-read the Wiki notibility guidelines WP:BIO, specifically the section that states, "People who satisfy at least one of the items below generally merit their own Wikipedia articles, as there is likely to be a good deal of verifiable information available about them and a good deal of public interest in them. This is not intended to be an exclusionary list; just because someone doesn't fall into one of these categories doesn't mean an article on the person should automatically be deleted."

--DodgeM4S 21:05, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

  • ADDITIONAL NOTES Please keep in mind that these flagged articles were never intended to stand solely by themselves. This content was written as supplemental components to the comprehensive history of the Florida Film Industry that I've been working on. I'm also concerned that other independent films that I've posted will be flagged and deleted for similar Notability reasons (and wish to protect them now). I wrote submissions for Olive Juice and Walking Across Egypt which like Alone and Restless are not notable mainstream Hollywood films -- yet all were historically important to this area as more Independent Filmmakers choose to shoot here. I plan to continue submitting information on independent film, but I'm a little shocked by all the hostility towards Indie films on Wiki..... Of course, I was also shocked to discover while writing the Florida Film Industry page that the locally produced HBO miniseries From Earth to the Moon had no Wiki coverage, either. Don't worry, I'm working on the content for that TV show, too.

--DodgeM4S 21:35, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

  • QUESTION So is it all right to list other indepedent film makers, too? I am working on content for prominant local independent filmmaker/actor [3] Todd Thompson. Again this submission would be a component to my Florida Film Industry page.

--DodgeM4S 07:35, 25 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.