Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney Chang

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 of the debate was delete. Johnleemk | Talk 12:48, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rodney Chang

Looks like a Vanity page. Non-notable ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 22:17, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

Could you please give details?—Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.156.96.247 (talk • contribs)
Please see Wikipedia:Notability ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 23:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
See also Wikipedia:Reliable sources ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 03:45, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Needs to provide some evidence, but I'd say having your art displayed internationally was pretty notable. Abstain for now but might change to keep if evidence is provided. Jcuk 23:00, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
Have you checked the refs? ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 23:01, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
  • There is 100% evidence. Pygoya is a web historian who documents his life efforts online. Visit [1] for each and every detail. Also to be found in article. There are not many artists with so manyfold life achievements. Artingrid 00:42, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment But is there any third-party evidence, that is to say evidence that is not from himself or persons or websites directly connected with him? Stifle 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
    • Third-party evidence is one of the main issues at Pygoya's website. All sources are carefully documented and easily to access. Artingrid 10:55, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
      • I do appreciate that you and Rodney are artists, but to be featured in Wikipedia you need to pass the test of notability. Please read Wikipedia:Criteria_for_inclusion_of_biographies and Wikipedia:Reliable sources. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:24, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
      • The reference you cited is Dr. Chang's own website, and that is not third-party. Stifle 00:51, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
        • The reference I cite is for sure not Dr. Chang's website, Dr. Chang's website is only the source where you can find the link to proven third party evidence. Dr. Chang is known as a web historian. It is one of his foremost goals to give evidence. Look up the weblinks too for third party evidence. One more thing: if you refer e. g. to a press article you have to scan this article, right? And for sure you show this scanned article on your website. How else should it work? Of course this article then is shown on your website but nevertheless is proven third-party evdidence. Artingrid 14:34, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as unverified outside of his own article, website, and friend. Stifle 01:36, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
    • This is simply false. There are dozens of links clearly providing third-party evidence. Of course they are often to be found on Dr. Chang's website! Where else and why not! He provides every visitor with evidence by giving the link to the documented third-party facts. If one scans a document she or he gets from a third party and links to this document on his website within his website it is nevertheless a third party document. I just want to make it clear that a third party document is a third party document not matter where it is shown. Artingrid 16:14, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete unless reliable independent references found Dlyons493 Talk 02:11, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep he really was on Real People. I am working on getting more external links on him. Gmosaki 07:20, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep many more links added to give even more evidence. Thank you Gmosaki for also editing more links. Artingrid 16:01, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
Is Artingrid a friend of Rodney Chang? .Also, regarding your own article at [[Ingrid Kamerbeek also in WP:AfD, I would suggest that you read Wikipedia:Autobiography. It is considered inappropriate to write your own article. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 16:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
It's a bit borderline whether User:Artingrid should be considered a sockpuppet. I think probably not, but this vote should not be fully counted either. The entire edit history of this user is the creation of the articles Ingrid Kamerbeek and Rodney Chang (who are profesessionally or personally acquainted/colleagues IRL), and voting on the subseqent AfD's. The former article is apparently the same person as the WP user. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 20:21, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Artingrid is a friend of every notable artist who evidently has proven third party confirmed achievements which definitely meet the Wikipedia requirements. Artingrid 11:30, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
It seems to be that you are either friends or associates. See [2]. That is wonderful, but please note that wikipedia is not free web hosting or a place to promote your art or your business. Third party confirmations is just a small portion of what is needed. I would suggest you read Wikipedia:Vanity_guidelines and Wikipedia:Notability so that you can be informed about Wikipedia content policies. I have also placed a Welcome message in your talk page with further pointers about Wikipedia and how it all works. Hope you find these helpful. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 15:52, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Thank you for the helpful Welcome message, Jossi! You are welcome.
Pygoya and myself founded the Webism Group of Worldwide Artists after our 1st real life European art tour in 2003. Of course we work together. We work together for global culture, peace and understanding. We have reached quite notable results as you surely found out. We are more than 50 worldwide artists, some of them at Wikipedia already. I put the article "Pygoya" to Wikipedia because he simply should be in with his 10 degrees, including 2 doctorates, honorary professor, NBC Real People Show, inclusion in Ripley's, Who's Who, his art on show around the globe in museums and galleries, etc. etc. He's also a digital art pioneer, ask Laurence Gartel who's in Wikipedia. Everybody could have put him in with his acknowledged merits. So why not me. I just point to the facts. What about a broader audience for this entry so I do not need to give further explanations. To me it would be in no way understandable if you wouldn't let him in. And this not because we work together but because the facts speak its own language.Artingrid 17:38, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
Please note that this is not about "letting him in". Please read the guidelines provided. The article as it stands will either be deleted, or it will need to be cleaned up as per Wikipedia guidelines. The article of Laurence Gartel id a good example of a simple and straight-forward biography, although it lacks references for some of the assertions made. Nevertheless, you can compare it with the article in question Rodney Chang. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 18:15, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
ok. You know I am a newbie here. So please be of help with the clean-up to make "Rodney Chang" fitting to the Wikipedia guidelines. Thank you. Artingrid 19:14, 10 January 2006 (UTC)
If the article survives the Votes for deletion, I will lend you a hand. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @
Again added more links to valid sources outside Pygoya's website Artingrid 16:35, 12 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Suspicious keep This definitely seems to have started out as a vanity puff piece; and it still needs substantial cleanup to reach encyclopedic tone. It's pretty clear that Artingrid is closely associated IRL. And the number of anonymous votes here sure suggest sockpuppetry (poorly executed, since anon votes should/will not be counted here). However, there appears to be at least a claim of genuine notability in having displayed at a number of museums of worldwide reputation. Seems to get some mention in indexes of artists online, e.g. [3], [4], both of which appear to be independent sources rather than ones controlled by Chang or direct friends. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 18:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC) Followup: Unless or until someone else provides verifiable links to the museum exhibitions claimed, I'll trust Jossi's below judgement about the non-verifiability of theses shows. The scam awards push it to delete.
  • Thanks. Please note that anyone can sell their art online at artmajeur.com (your 1st source) [5] and hundreds of other on-line art communities and websites. Also note that any artist (notable or not) can post their bios at americanartists.org (your second source) [6]. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 21:18, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Well, Like I say, it's a pretty weak keep. But the several stated showings at known brick-and-morter museums and galleries seem to give Chang the nudge. Not to slam-dunk notability (a group show isn't that hard to get), but to the minimual standards I have in mind. But if his works really did appear at "Bronx Museum of Arts in New York (1987), Shanghai Art Museum (1988), Holter Museum of Art (1990), Tartu Art Museum in Estonia (1990), the Las Vegas Art Museum (1990), and the Vienna Museum Complex (2003)." that seems notable to me. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 22:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
I am really trying hard, to see if indeed Mr. rtChang passes the notability test.... but the more I research these exibitions the ony thing I encounter are self-published accounts of these. I have yet to find a mention of this artist in any of the museums listed. All I find is self-published stuff at, his personal site, free art sites, friends and associates sites, or link farms. Just search on Google, for example: "Holter Museum of Art" "Rodney Chang"[7] or "Shanghai Art Museum" "Rodney Chang"[8] or "Tartu Art Museum" "Rodney Chang"[9] Very, very strange stuff, indeed. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 01:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
    • This above announcement will not be counted as it states - where is the user name?
Thank you, Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters for now giving your identity after you have been asked. Artingrid 20:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Actually, I did so initially too, but you separated the portion of my comment with the signature from the initial part. However, I'm sure that was an innocent editing error. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 22:11, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Also: Read Wikipedia welcomes unsigned comments too if in good faith.
To make it totally clear who Artingrid is:
Ingrid Kamerbeek, Bahnhofstr. 7, D-87527 Sonthofen/Bavaria/Germany, artist.
Want to know more? Ok, look up my website.
Just search for Ingrid Kamerbeek in Google.
Pygoya lives on the other side of the world: Honolulu, Hawaii.
Working together on a worldwide scale with and for artists has nothing to do with the fact that Pygoya with his acknowledged merits belongs to Wikipedia.
Neutrality of the admin is a main question here. Jossi is a digital artist himself.
I thought of Wikipedia as a good idea. Thank you for giving me a better insight. Artingrid 20:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Anon "votes"

Wrong: Below comments are not anon but with full name. Artingrid 20:58, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Anon refers to contributors that do not have a Wikipedia user name. Jossi 21:20, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but if they let us know their names by writing it down after their comments they are nevertheless not anonymous. Artingrid 22:04, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Whatever they might state their names to be in the outside world, if they do not have WP usernames, they do not have an established WP reputation. Specifically, such anon IPs are often used by "meatpuppets"... people recruited by interested parties solely for the purpose of a particular vote; and as such are not counted as votes among the Wikipedia community. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 22:10, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - If 10 degrees including 2 doctorates besides many other worthy proven achievements are regarded as not notable what else is notable! For sure Pygoya is a computer art pioneer and distributor on the internet. His art is logically developed from the classical board image.

Enormously risen prices for participation in art fairs and exhibitions is doubtlessly one aspect of Pygoya's efforts to establish art soleyly created by changing pixels to art. This way global culture and exchange is made possible for any artist around the globe at low cost. Press reports give evidence of high interest in digital art. Pygoya on his website presents a great resource of third-party confirmation of his achievements and activities. Digital art is a medium which without the internet wouldn't have come true. And it might be destiny that this is a fact also with Wikipedia. arno signarowski 13.01.2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.253.170.158 (talk • contribs)

  • Keep - Rodney Chang "Pygoya" has been displaying his artwork on absolutearts.com since 2002. Pygoya has been a regular contributor to the absolutearts.com blog forum since 2004. His efforts as an artist are matched also by his commitment to unify artists around the work for better promotion and creation of exhibitions regardless of an artist's physical location. absolutearts.com can verify that Rodney Chang "Pygoya" is a computer art pioneer. Jodi Melfi, Vice-President, absolutearts.com166.102.8.185 16:51, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
With all due respect to the above anons, obviously friends and/or associates of Mr. Chang, and non-withstanding the fact that Mr. Chang is an artist, please note that the criteria for notability of a person for their inclusion in Wikipedia is quite specific. Please read Please read Wikipedia:Notability (people). Concerning absoluteart.com, that in itself is not a mark of notability, as there are hundreds of artists in this and many other art websites. There are hundreds of thousands of digital artists that may consider themselves pioneers, but that is not sufficient, I am afraid. Jossi 17:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

So - if one of the largest, oldest online portals for fine art is not a creditable source to vouch for a computer artists notibility, who is? "Painters, sculptors, architects, engineers, and other professionals whose work is recognized as exceptional and likely to become a part of the enduring historical record of that field". Rodney Chang "Pygoya" falls in this catagory, in my opinion. ALSO - I think you may find that he also could be considered as one who has "A large fan base, fan listing or 'cult' following". Jodi Melfi166.102.8.185 18:05, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Thank you Jodi for your comment. Our opinions are our opinions, but Wikipedia articles are not based on Wikipedia editors' opinions but in reporting the opinions and points of view of reputable sources as defined by Wikipedia guidelines. Read: Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Jossi 21:28, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Jossi: All you state above is before your very eyes: Opinions and points of view of reputable sources as defined by Wikipedia guidelines.

Sorry, Ingrid. I have yet to come across one such reputable source. All what I have seen so far is seems very much like self-promotion. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 23:23, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
For example, this self-published book Jossi 23:26, 13 January 2006 (UTC)
Here is the ISBN No. of this a. m. book:(ISBN 1-4196-2168-8). It is not to be seen at booksurge website right now due to changes Dr. Chang did. It will be online again asap.

According to Wikipedia guidelines the admin who votes for deletion of an entry should not be the same who decides. And especially not in your case because you do not look at this article from a neutral point of view. Artingrid 22:53, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Fear no more ... as the nominator of the AfD, I will not close it. Another admin will. And BTW, I am as neutral as it can be... I never heard of Mr. Chang until a few days ago when came across this article while doing RC patrol (recent changes patrol against vandalism of Wikipedia). Jossi 23:12, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Oh, just for clarification of the above said: it gives a false impression. Of course unintentionally, right? Artingrid 00:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

The admin who closes this AfD will be someone uninvolved with the voting. That's how these things are done. Some neutral admin will look through AfD votes that are a week or so old, count up the votes (including discounting anons or brand new accounts), and decide what action is appropriate. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 23:07, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


Thank you both, Jossi and Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters for your explanations. I am totally sure that nobody who does research work on the internet as you surely do and moreover somebody who calls himself a digital artist who comes across digital artists and art sites all the time can "avoid" to know Dr. Rodney Chang (Pygoya) because he is everywhere on the web. There are also links to his website from the articles Jossi initiated at Wikipedia and carefully watches. Just some thoughts... I have many more...Artingrid 00:23, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

Are you accusing me of something? That is indeed preposterous. I have never heard of Mr Chang, Webism or Artingrid until a few days ago when someone added a long piece of material to this article and it lit up on my RC patrol console as possible giberish addition by an anon IP. Now, you can believe that or, not. That is your prerrogative, of course. In Wikipedia we ask contributors to assume good faith. ≈ jossi ≈ t • @ 01:15, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

FYI, during my attempt to verify some of the achievements awards listed d on Mr. Chang's website http://www.lastplace.com/page36.htm I found these:

  • "Man of the Year - 2005, American Biographical Institute, Raleigh, N.C."
... but then found scam reports about this "award": [10], [11], [12]
  • "America's Registry of Outstanding Professionals, 2003-2004"
.. but then read similar scam reports about this "registry": [13]
  • "The Contemporary Who's Who of Professionals"
... but could not find any such thing anywhere, besides mentions alongside of one of the scams above.

I stopped checking after these three. Jossi 06:09, 14 January 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.