Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Swami X

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 no consensus. -→Buchanan-Hermit™/?! 06:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Swami X

Is this really worth an article? I am getting the munchies for delete. --Nlu (talk) 06:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete the sources given are very barely mentioning this guy at all, not enough to support what is said in this article. --Daniel Olsen 06:49, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment this person has not read the sources. The published books cited in the article, in particular, set the scene for Venice Beach in California in the 1960s and 1970s and identify Swami X as a noteable part of the scene. It is inarguable that Swami X's name is widely copied and parodied as a persona and that his witicisms have been published and quoted so often that NOT to include his biography in Wikipedia would be to omit a notable personage from a source that is supposed to supply knowledge where the standard publications fail to do so. The addition of "Swami X and his lady (in her leopard skin bikini and bellydancer's fancy waist-encircling jewelry) sat on the steps of Billy's Boarding House playing chess" underscores the matter of fact relationship between the subject of this article and the social milieu of Venice Beach in the 1970s. How can those of you who have not been there be so dismissive? How do you respond to the fundamental point, that a stand-up comedian who works on the street, i.e. a busker (look it up before you comment further) is not "reknowned in his own field". "Reknown" is a contextual term, and not solely based on whether one has achieved noteriety in the past 25 minutes on CNN or MTV!!! Elcajonfarms 04:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep While it still needs a bit of work, the article is decent enough, and convinced me that the Swami was at least marginally notable as an long-time and well-known eccentric street performer. --Brianyoumans 06:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - The article does need more sources but it passes WP:NOTABILITY. Really, no reason to delete --NRS T/M\B 07:42, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, but Clean up. This article in completely original research, doesn't have the right tone for an encyclopedia, and doesn't cite sources. However, a google search gets 11,600 hits so he passes the notability test. Someone just needs to completely rewrite it, that's all. Ultra-Loser Talk Comparison of BitTorrent sites 08:56, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment that figure of 11,600 Google results is not reliable. I checked through the first few pages and only a couple of the resultsw are anything to do with the subject of this article. I suspect the vast majority are unrelated. A more narrow search for "Swami.X Berkeley" returns just 38 results
  • Response to Comment Why don't you try an equally narrow search for "Swami X Venice"? you will find 35,000 hits!!! Also, before assuming this is not a significant venue, you might also try a search for "Venice Beach" and for "Venice, California" to get a better idea of the setting and prominence of this public figure, Swami X. Elcajonfarms 03:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

[1], now I suspect there are more results to be found, but its probably a few hundred, not 10,000+. Gwernol 18:13, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

  • Response to further comment Actually, if you search "Swami X Venice Beach" you will find 26,000 hits!!! Elcajonfarms 03:13, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep -- Anyone quoted as widely as Swami X, who has been a noteable personality and performer in the the second largest metropolitan area of the United States (Los Angeles) for over 35 years, is worth an article in Wikipedia.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Elcajonfarms (talk • contribs)
  • Keep, but Edit as appropriate. This article's subject meets Wikipedia's proposed policy for notability for comedians and *stand-up performers, see [2], including the required references in multiple published non-trivial and reputable media, and the criterion for most prominent representative of the local scene in a particular city. The notability criteria for Wiki people [3] pose some obstacles for performers who do not regularly appear in corporate media sponsored venues such as radio, television and movies, and for that reason the proposed policy is more appropriate for the consideration of comedians, particularly street performers and other buskers. A review of the article on busking should suffice to confirm that Swami X satisfies these criteria for notability within his particular field. Further, it is noted that the existing notability policy for people, [4], specifically states: "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."—Preceding unsigned comment added by Elcajonfarms (talk • contribs)
  • Comment no opinion... but header your AfD's so it is correctly displayed on the main Articles for Deletion page.--Isotope23 18:24, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Ah I see what happened now... malformed by someone trying to add a sig...--Isotope23 18:28, 26 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Reasonable article about local cultural icon. -Will Beback 17:52, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Please note that the noteability of Swami X has been affirmed by mediators in a previous challenge to this article. [5]. Elcajonfarms.
  • Comment that's a misrepresentation of the meditor's comment. The comnment is the article now "asserts notability". Asserting notability is not the same as demonstrating notability. The article was being speedy deleted because it didn't even claim that Swami X was notable. Now its been improved to the point where it claims he's notable. That doesn't mean he is notable, but at least means its notability should be debated. That is what we are doing here. Gwernol 18:18, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Response to Comment by Gwernol your suggestion that my comment was a "misrepresentation" is actually a false misrepresentation in and of itself. The mediator, whose Wiki name is Where, responded to the following question about notability standards: "Would you agree that someone who has been an active recognizable comedian in the second largest metropolitan area of the United States [i.e., Los Angeles ] for over 35 years and who is himself the subject of many identifiable citations meets the following standard in the PROPOSED Wikipedia criteria for "noteable comedians"? His response, via an email which you understandably could not have known about, as follows: "Yes; I agree." ElcajonfarmsElcajonfarms 03:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


  • Weak Delete the sources are either not reliable or only mention Swami X in passing, per Daniel Olsen. The article is full of WP:POV statements like "Swami X hereafter will forever be remembered in the pantheon of internationally reknowned commentators on the human condition" and clear original research. I'm making this a "weak" delete because there is a very weak notability case being made, but I'm not convinced that he reaches Wikipedia:Notability (comedy). Gwernol 18:22, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
Comment not to be tendentious, but I fail to see how today's "featured article" *[6] about someone who does not even exist (a character in a Nintendo game) could be more "notable" than an actual person who has achieved sufficient noteriety to be mentioned in a bunch of books and newspaper articles about a countercultural mecca like Venice, California and who is a widely quoted figure. Elcajonfarms 03:04, 1 October 2006 (UTC) 02:14, 1 October 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.