Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Magic Dudes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Discounting all unsigned votes and votes by brand new users, the results were 20 votes to delete, 2 to keep. Postdlf 21:03, 16 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Magic Dudes

[edit] Discussion/Votes

Not particulary notable. Channel 31 is public access, and spends a good part of its programming time showing aquariums of open fireplaces. The same user has also added these guys to List of magicians and Magic (illusion) as notable magicians (in between David Copperfield and Harry Blackstone, no less). Aaron Brenneman 9 July 2005 04:39 (UTC)

Comment: Also see this VFD for more of the same. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 23:48, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEPThis article should be kept as the List of magicians has now been put into alphabetical order and thus The Magic Dudes appears in alphabetical order (under M for Magic Dudes... originally slotted as D for Dudes, which was why it followed David Copperfield). As noted in the article, Channel 31 was just where the first pilot showed, and so what if it was community TV? The TV station still had to request the pilot and decide to air it.MagicFan 9 July 2005 05:30 (UTC)
  • Delete. Promotion for non-notable magicians. The whole point of public access is that anyone can get a show. BTW, "Magic Dudes" would go under "M", because "Dudes" isn't a last name. — Gwalla | Talk 9 July 2005 06:31 (UTC)
  • Comment Please note Channel 31 just aired the pilot. OTHER television stations requested the series. I also beg to differ on the comments made regarding Channel 31 and community television in general. I believe the comments made probably come from people who aren't invloved in the television industry (neither am I BTW), have never had a show on TV and have probably not seen the series mentioned or the television station in question (BTW I have at least seen both). In general, a lot of programming on community TV comes from shows previously aired on commercial networks (e.g. look at Channel 31 in Melbourne). There are numerous articles throughout Wikipedia mentioning community stations all over the world. I also do not believe that it can be that easy to get a show on TV (I can't say I know anyone who has a show on TV). I personally think a 12 part series that has been shown across a country as big as Australia is very noteworthy. BTW, Magic Dudes are now listed under M.MagicFan 9 July 2005 08:51 (UTC)
    • Please note that you are only to vote once. Any other comments (like further edits) may be signified using the Comment: tag. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 07:48 (UTC)
  • Delete. Vanity/advertisement. Postdlf 9 July 2005 07:36 (UTC)
  • Delete as per Postdlf. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 9 July 2005 07:39 (UTC)
  • Delete for now. No notable achievements as of yet... (heck, i've been on public television a couple of times..) No real improvement through the edits... Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 07:48 (UTC)
  • Keep They had their own series on TV. I think that makes them noteworthy of a mention. Wikipedia is a great resource of "Whos Who" and they obviously have a profile. Michael Douglas 9 July 2005 07:58 (UTC) This is the user's first edit. See [1]. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 9 July 2005 07:59 (UTC)
  • No it's not... I just wasn't registered before!!Michael Douglas 01:09, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn / vanity. :Note, sockpuppetry already? <>Who?¿? 9 July 2005 08:06 (UTC)
  • Comment I reviewed all the info I could find on the subject, unfortunately, it's mostly self-promotion, that I found on the web, links on shopping sites pointing to their "unused" website. If at some time in the future, these guys become syndicated, then it may warrant an article. There is not enough information or content to support an article for a public broadcast channel show. As for the socketpuppets, I kind of feel bad, new user, getting their first article Vfd'd, and asking friends to help. Hard way to learn, but hopefully with more time on Wiki, will learn the rules and develop some good research and editing skills. I remain at delete. <>Who?¿? 20:23, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Here come the delete dudes! Radiant_>|< July 9, 2005 08:20 (UTC)
  • I had to look up what it meant, but I am offended what "Who" is suggesting. Michael Douglas 9 July 2005 08:37 (UTC)
    • Then wuts with the influx of newbie votes? Logical explination = sockpuppetry of some sort. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 10:32 (UTC)
  • Speaking only for myself; I have edited many times but only just registered. I thought you had to register to vote and I felt strongly enough about this one to have a say.Michael Douglas 01:11, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
Then what IP address(es) did you use to make "past edits". --Madchester 04:50, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep the Magic Dudes are worthy of inclusion as they are known in Australia MardyThis is the user's first edit. See [2]. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 10:32 (UTC)

9 July 2005 10:08 (UTC) This is the user's first edit besides their own user page. See [3].

  • Comment: Stop the puppets already. Leave it up to the community to decide. If you want to make your case, do so by making yourself notable. But for now, leave it alone. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 10:32 (UTC)
  • Keep This is an unsollicited testimonial from a satisifed audience member. The Magic Dudes are certainly real and are widely known within the Australian magical entertainment industry.I want to believe... 9 July 2005 10:43 (UTC)Note:This user deleted his previous vote and voted again, along with deleting my comment. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 10:49 (UTC)
  • Did you ever consider a wide fan base?? Why shouldn't people new to Wikipedia have the opportunity to comment on what we think is important too? Maybe you need to reaquaint with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Please_do_not_bite_the_newcomersMichael Douglas 9 July 2005 10:44 (UTC)
    • If they truly had such a wide fan base, someone (a contributing wikipedia member that has shown good edits) would have heard of this group. Not to mention it needs press coverage. Plus, these sockpuppets ARE NOT helping your cause. I am not saying new wikipedians should not comment, but the fact that they got DIRECTLY to this VFD page suggest there is something fishy. I am not accusing the biting the newcomers as there have been no personal attacks or harsh critcism. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions July 9, 2005 10:54 (UTC)
comment: the user I want to believe... has been making random deletions to edits made to this page.[4]
  • COMMENT: Incl notes on precedent supporting article As The Magic Dudes was my first entry to Wikipedia, I am really miffed at what is going on here. I had had other "edits" on Wikipedia and added other magicians and acts etc. to the Magic entries. As you can no doubt guess, I am a huge fan of magic. I am really angry to see my hard work of adding links etc. has been deleted by people who have nothing to do with my entries and maybe aren't even magic fans at all (so how would they know anything about the topic). My thought in putting the post up in the first place was that these guys have been on TV, had their own series etc etc. It wasn't just a guest appearance on someone elses show... they had their OWN show. I thought that was pretty noteworthy as I haven't seen any other magicians on TV in Australia apart from the old favourites such as Copperfield and the arch enemy of magicians, The Masked Magician. When I put the entry up, I obviously told other magic fans about my entry so they could see what I had done. Before all I have ever been able to do is add information on magicians already named. This was my first new entry. To see it be called into question is turning me off the whole Wikipedia experience. I cannot be held responsible for some fans of the Magic Dudes going over board in their support of this entry and doing things they shouldn't be doing. I am thrilled however that word is spreading that people are trying to destroy my post and people are taking the time to not only come and look at my post but also to register to try and stop its destruction. To abuse them by calling them sockpuppets is just not warranted and I agree with Mr Douglas that new comers should be given the benefit of the doubt. They obviously new enough about the Magic Dudes to spend the time to register and vote and I think that speaks volumes as I found the whole process of learning Wikipedia less than easy. I have done my best to change the post to answer its criticisms, but just because you people from overseas haven't heard of some Australian magicians makes their achievements no less notable than of they had been Canadians... outside of the magic community, I doubt very much people in Australia have heard of Jay Sankey, but it makes him none the less a very notable magician. I am sure many more Canadians have heard of him, just as I suspect many laymen in Australia are familiar with the Magic Dudes, having seen them on TV. The Magic Dudes meet the requirements to be considered notable by precedent. Wikipedia states that an author is considered notable if they have had a book published. The Magic Dudes have had a TV show broadcast. Some people in their delete comments have stated that Channel 31 is not noteworthy, but for a television or radio station to be notable, Wikipedia says that it should have broadcast "at least regionally". Considering Channel 31 is established in most Australian states, I would think that is pretty notable. I therefore think there is precedent for my post. As an indication on the quality of talent shown on Channel 31, see the Wikipedia post on Rove McManus. If you look at his offical biography at http://www.rovelive.com/rove/current/bio.asp, you will see that he had a show on Channel 31 and sees it as important enough to include in his bio. And Rove is no light weight. In no less than 2002, 2003 and 2004 he won the Gold Logie award for the most popular personality on Australian television! Hardly a goldfish swimming in a bowl!!MagicFan 9 July 2005 12:43 (UTC)
    • I can see why you might be miffed. However to carry out your miffed-ness by shameless repeat voting on your own article (or encouraging friends to) is an extremely good way to make the community want to delete it. Go back, retract the false votes (by striking them out with <s> and </s> and prove their notability in what remains of the 5 day VfD procedure. Otherwise be sure it will go down in flames. -Splash 9 July 2005 14:04 (UTC)
    • Note that rove has had national recognition and extends FAR beyond Channel 31 whilst the Magic Dudes seem limited to a very very local prespective. Also, anon IP's are allowed to vote on VFD and their votes are counted. But think about it, what are the chances that ALL these new users would come to this VfD first? Its really hard not to suspect sockpuppetry.... Plus, i'm not saying their votes don't count, in the end, it will be weighted by an admin who will close this vote. Again, please read WP:Importance and brush up on policy a little. Also, Channel 31 is not as notable as the major networks as it IS public access. Heck, there are lots of shows on my local public access station, most of which DO NOT deserve an article in an encyclopedia eg. http://www.thegeekshow.com/ its only syndicated in Alberta on Access. and Channel 31 broadcasts different things in different locations unlike nationally syndicated networks. That's a big difference, ultimately, public access focuses on local audiences and locally produced shows for most of their shows. Of this time, The Magic Dudes do not meet the WP criterion for notability. Until further press coverage/show expansion is achieved, they do not deserve a encyclopedia article. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:52, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. NN J E Bailey 9 July 2005 14:03 (UTC)
  • Delete sockpuppet supported vote about non-notable magician that gets only relevant Google hits. AND THERE ARE TOO MANY CAPITAL LETTERS. -Splash 9 July 2005 14:04 (UTC)
  • Comment This is probably overkill, as the direction this is going is pretty clear, but what the heck, I've got ten minutes until my cake comes out of the oven anyway.
  • On channel 31 right now is "On The Couch" and they are doing a special on the Espy Hotel. Never heard of it? That's because it's about two kilometers away from my house and it is a (really bloody fantastic) pub where mostly unsigned (but really bloody fantastic) bands play. After that is "Vasili's Garden", another good show, I like that Vasili, He sold me some good tomatoes this year, his nursery is like four blocks from my house. Who is he interviewing tonight? Jumping Jesus on a pogo stick, that's Cosimo, he literally lives right across the street from me! Small world, man. (This, by the way is all completely true, I was watching it before I decided to come in here and write this.)
  • I watched Rove on 31 back when dinosaurs roamed the earth. I thought his show was great on then and it's shite now that Dave is gone. But if someone had put a Rove article up then, I'd have nominated it for VfD. Rove, you may have noticed, went on from channel 31 to do something else. And no one found his "31" roots important enough to add to his page until your edit of 12:57, 9 July 2005.
  • So when you guys sorry, those guys, go on to win a Gold Logie (as voted on by the reader of TV Week magazine) I'll vote keep.
Oh, I smell black forest. I'd better wrap up. AMagicianStoleMyPantsOnceAndNowIHateThemAll 9 July 2005 14:11 (UTC)
  • I went and followed the Rove link. Why would you want to delete Australia's most popular TV talent of three years running (I thought he had won in 2005 too, but maybe we haven't had that award yet)? Anyway, I followed all the links including the one to Rove's biography. Turns out that Rove actually mentions Channel 31 himself. I think this has more to do with you hating magicians than anything else. I read an article by Jay Sankey once (yes, I've heard of him even though he is Canadian) and he mentioned the "magician haters". IMHO, if you aren't into magic as an art form, then why are you commenting on the noteworthiness or otherwise of a particular magician (or in this case two?). Have you heard of Jay Sankey, or Brad Christian, Oz Perlman, Darwin Ortiz???? I can well understand why fans of magic are getting upset on here. Michael Douglas 01:26, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Aaron was saying that IF there was an article on Rove back when he was ONLY on Channel 31, he would have VFDed that page, but Rove has had much more noteriety than that. And we are not "hating magicians" as you put it. We are simply following the set Wikipedia policy. It doesn't matter if they're magicians, or artist, or scientist or CEOs, we still apply the same standards. Jay Sankey shows notability as his trick was performed by Copperfield, an OBVIOUS credit to his talents and meaning he has achieved a degree of notability to be noticed in the magic world and general public. The Magic Dudes have put their own show on public TV (heck, gimme a couple hundred bucks and i can do the same thing) and produced their OWN DVD thats not mass distributed. Doesn't quite make the cut. And it doesn't matter if we've heard of them or not, we're judging on the basis of the article. That's a fair judgement for an encyclopedia. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 22:54, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • CommentPheweee!!! read a few of those things up there...I think certain wannabe I.T. geeks are taking themselves just a tad too seriously. Whats this web site for again? A public forum for recognition of fine peoples (Magicians included) achievements or a rather pathetically insecure way of telling the world of what they do and dont personally prefer? Geesh, go tell mommy 8-) SHE probably cares. OH and by the way, if its all too complicated for you to learn about professional data base design and management, perhaps you better step aside and let the pros do it for you! OH and by the way by he way..where the hell did THIS excuse for a user interface come from? What:-O you dont know about that stuff. No go on...really? Geesh...Waiting feedback, if youve got it in you...From somewhere in the WORLD outside the latent north american republic!
    • It's neither, it's an encyclopedia. Do you think your personal attacks are anything new around here? -- Cyrius|✎ 9 July 2005 17:17 (UTC)
    • I have to admit though, I love it when someone chucks a spaz. It lets me feel superior without having to do any work. IsThatAWandInYourPocket? 9 July 2005 17:54 (UTC)
    • Eh? Who said we were I.T. geeks? you don't really have to know computers to use Wikipedia... and if u dun like MediaWiki, go build something yourself and create your own Wiki =) that's wut the internet's for. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:52, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - public access magic show. Wikipedia is not a forum for promotion. -- Cyrius|✎ 9 July 2005 17:17 (UTC)
  • Strong delete. I can imagine a public access program being notable but the article is just puffery and doesn't show that. Strong for making a mockery of the process. Dcarrano July 9, 2005 17:37 (UTC)
  • KEEPI saw their performance. The Magic Dudes are very personable and most entertaining. Some say 'Magic happens', well it does in the Magic Dudes very own act!! well done guys.
Just a note, I agree with the previous persons comment about the user interface. You people could get help with this. You should start with approriate exception handling and deliver useful error messages to the end users. Just a helpful tip, one should spot the difference between personal attacks and up to date comments from apparently qualified yet frustrated colleges, it all helps.Tomcat1 9 July 2005 17:49 (UTC)
    • User's only edit.[5]
  • KEEP I think The Magic Dudes should stay here. They seem to be hard working entertainers. Everyone in acting knows how hard it can be to do tv slot after tv slot, all the preperation and its over in One hour.Dragon748 9 July 2005 18:26 (UTC)
    • User's only edits.[6]
  • Delete with extreme prejudice. Not notable, vanity, sockpuppet invasion. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL July 9, 2005 18:40 (UTC)
  • Delete. Bye bye sockpuppets. --Madchester July 9, 2005 19:04 (UTC)
  • Keep The magic dudes my vote is to keep them i found them amusing and so did my three year old son.David copperfield they are not and if they were maybe they could make the turkeys that bag them out disappear.Community TV thats what C31 is sockpuppets are funny you see them at schools all around australia Maybe the critics should take a pill and give these dudes a go before canning them. You have to start somewhere and you are ahead of the turkeys that are still sitting on there computers thinking of the next thing to be negative about. Good luck dudes Terry & Maz
    • Only edit by User:Cap-10.[7]
  • Modified article Still trying to take on board relevant comments and have modified artivle to take into account those comments that make sense.MagicFan 00:36, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I like the rewrite. I was never comfortable with "rumours" being mentioned. I am a fan of the Magic Dudes though and am glad that someone else felt it important enough to put them in. Thanks MagicFan. Michael Douglas 01:28, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep What the hell is going on here? The people in question are obviously real. They have a regular act and have done a number of verifiable performances. I suggest the wannabe delete-ers get off their lazy a#%es and go do something themselves which is worthy of widespread puclic awareness! Then we shall see how you go with the editing page. Vote for inclusion and support this forum and your fellow achieveing brothers I say!!Corsair1 02:36, 10 July 2005 (UTC) User's first edit. [8].
    • Note that Wikipedia is not an advertisement agency. We are not here to spread public awareness about any issue but rather to be an encyclopedia, being a collection facts about things that have ALREADY been made famous. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:52, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete vanity, sockpuppet. Xoloz 06:03, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • KeepThe Magic Dudes are real and of prominance in Australian and increasingly international live entertainment arenas. They belong within the pages of any prominent encycolpedia in todays times. They are a part of history and are synonimous with Magical cultural entertainment in our world today. (Vote by IP 61.68.249.82, users first and only edit)[9]
  • Delete. This is completely a vanity article. Access TV is itself a vanity medium. The DVD that these "magicians" appear on is self-produced--i.e., it is a vanity DVD. Vanity, vanity, all is vanity. All over the world, there are hundreds of thousands of non-notable programs that have appeared on community access TV. Adding articles about them would quadruple the total number of current Wikipedia articles on all subjects. Fur Expert 18:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP. Magic dudes bring a little bit of laughter and joy to a world that is, at times, lacking in such things. Let the reference stay! Cahnnel 31 should be paying those 'dudes!' but, as they are not, remember that the magic dudes do their thing to bring a smile to people's faces and nothing more!(Ok, it brings a smile to their faces too!)...find another bandwagon to jump on and leave the magic dudes alone! Magic Dudes Groupie!
    • Unsigned comment by unregistered IP 202.6.138.34.[10] In case it wasn't clear, the votes of unregistered IPs and brand-new registered users are ignored. You're wasting your time. Postdlf 20:48, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
      • Actually in Wikipedia:Guide to Votes for Deletion, it says "Anyone can contribute to the discussion and vote, anonymous users as well as pseudonymous users". So they are not ignored. But it also says "If you are contributing your first article, or are a newly pseudonymous user, please state this clearly and up-front" which none of these users have done and that "Unsigned contributions may be discounted." which would discount this vote. FYI. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 22:12, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP:Lets keep the focus here on what its for. Keep The Magic Dudes. As you will see this is unsigned and a first vote. That seems to mean apparently as a member of the magic loving public I have to play this silly little game. It can obviously be determined that this is a first and unsigned vote. Hmm after reading the above, maybe I should make certain, since it seeme to be more inmportant than the VOTE which is what we are all supposed to be here for. Just in case its not clear, this is a first and unsigned vote this is a first and unsigned vote this is a first and unsigned vote this is a first and unsigned vote this is a first and unsigned vote this is a first and unsigned vote

!!Tell you what, I'll let you know this is in English to and I am currently wearing red sox and a blue t shirt! (Vote and comment by IP 61.68.248.83, his first edit [11]).

    • Besides the fact that you discounted this vote itself, the focus of a VfD is NOT the vote itself but the discussion. And that didn't add much to the discussion except the possibility of another sock puppet IP. And note that we are not being inconsistent. I marked Fur Expert's edit as well so there is no "game" or anything. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 23:43, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete magicians who have not achieved any real notability apart from working with sockpuppets. Capitalistroadster 00:01, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable magicians. --Calton | Talk 02:44, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: Sasquatch, thank you for you feedback regarding "Anyone can contribute to the discussion and vote, anonymous users as well as pseudonymous users". and advice that "If you are contributing your first article, or are a newly pseudonymous user, please state this clearly and up-front" which none of these users have done and that "Unsigned contributions may be discounted." I didn't know this (being new to Wikipedia) and I'm sure other people voting didn't either. Good to see some constructive comments for a change rather than the newby bashing that has gone on before. I must comment on Fur Experts comments. Access TV in North Amercia must be different to community TV in Australia. My understanding is that the shows are programmed by a programme director. You can't just "plug in" and transmit stuff. The fact that The Magic Dudes had a pilot on C31 before OTHER stations asked for the series seems to indicate to me that it is more complex than what you make out. Also, can you confirm your source that the DVD was self produced? Do you have a copy? There seems to be so much emphasis on the fact that these people made a START on C31. I don't see other people who STARTED on C31 being deleted. Furthermore, can someone please explain to me why THESE magicians are different to all the other magicians on Wikipedia? Is this a North American thing? If having their own TV series in multiple states of a country of 20 million isn't noteable, what is? Do they have to be North American? I have edited articles on other North American magicians before (both before and after registering) and none of these magicians has come up for deletion.MagicFan 02:58, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Let me show you something from this very article itself: "While the series continues to be shown on television, the Magic Dudes have not been seen performing together since producing their television series and DVD. It is hard to find out much more information on the Magic Dudes as they protect their actual identities closely. Their real names have never appeared on any advertising material for their shows or as credits on their TV series and at present their existing web site is under renovation after the announcement they are working on a stage show." To me, that sounds like this article is mostly used for promotion, which was why it was even put on here in the first place. I tried to look up information about these guys, I found nothing (see [12]). Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:03, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Yea, I have to take Zscout's side on this one. Even though they have been on TV, it just doesn't seem enough. For a couple of reasons a) Channel 31 is public access (even if threre is a program manager, it is signifangantly easier to get your own locally produced programs on air) b) they have done nothing else BEYOND just going on TV to indicate a level of notability and c) WP:V due to the lack of outside media coverage and public knowledge of the issue. This all seems to point that these guys do not deserve an article as of yet. I sincerely hope you guys luck in promoting yourselves and making a name for yourselves, but right now, you have to remember Wikipedia is not an advertising agency, its an encyclopedia, and The Magic Dudes just isn't encyclopedic yet. Sorry dudes. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:10, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Message for Sasquatch Sasquatch, not sure how to send you a message, but sure you'll be revisting this one again... you seem to understand the whole Wikipedia thing. I noticed that a VERY notable Canadian magician does not have an article in Wikipedia, but there is already an article on someone with the same name. How do you add an article on a different person with same name as someone who already has an article? Also, I getting really sick of the bullshit name slinging going on here (sockpuppetry, vanity, puffery etc etc). As you have actually made some constructive comments, as opposed to some other butt wipes who have posted here, could you make any suggestions as to what I need to do to improve this particular article for it to stay? I am a HUGE Magic Fan and I think any magician that has been on TV or is known more than regionally is worthy of an article (for example, lay people in Australia wouldn't have heard of Jay Sankey, but most magic fans I know know who he is... maybe he is more well known in Canada, but in the magic community, he is certainly WELL known and I notice the article on him has no such hassles as mine on the Magic Dudes). There are really notable magicians in Australia I would like to add, but I don't want to waste my team if I get abuse like I have on here.MagicFan 03:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Calling people "butt wipes" isn't constructive either. Accusations of sockpuppetry and vanity are meaningful in this forum. Grade-school insults are not. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 03:17, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
    • First, let me clarify sock puppet accusations, they arise from the INFLUX (you can go look at other VFDs and compare) of new user accounts suddenly being drawn to this page and voting keep. This tends to indicate EITHER a) someone is setting up multiple user accounts and voting repeatedly or b) that someone has told all their friends and family to come here and vote keep. Either way, a) means sockpuppet votes and shouldn't be counted and b) suggests that they have no notability outside people who know them personally. This would make those votes relatively meaningless compared to the others who have judged the article. Hope that makes sense? Anyways, I'll leave you a message on your talk page on how to create pages like that. And a vanity page just implies that The Magic Dudes was either written by the Magic Dudes themselves or someone really close to the Magic Dudes. Check out WP:BIO for more inforamation. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:10, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • For Zscout... I got most of my info from their website... I was able to find it at www.magicdudes.com. I had it saved in my favourites. It used to have more than one page, but looks like it is down for reno at this time as the links from the page have gone. Also in Google, I got four other sites referencing this site.MagicFan 03:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
Now it makes more sense. Since their official site is down, the Magic Dudes are trying to use Wikipedia for free promotion and webspace, neither of which are allowed. --Madchester 05:15, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
From the four references, if we are even talking about the same thing, could be mirrors of Wikipedia. Many have popped up, so looking for stuff is hard. Plus, most of the mentions the Magic Dudes have to here refer to this vote. Plus, since most of the stuff you mainly copied from is from their website, that is where the vantity/promotion aurguement kicks in. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 03:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • For Zscout again... no, I didn't get those Wikipedia links you mentioned? Does Google give different things in different countries? The references I got were from other web sites to the Magic Dudes web site. I can almost see what you are saying re the vanity if I cut and pasted from the Dudes web site. Do you have an constructive suggestions as to what I could change in my article to remove that aspect? I only added them because I was online doing Google searches for them and came across Wikipedia links to magicians, but couldn't find them there. I've seen them on TV, so I thought they deserved an article. There are a few other Australian magicians I have noticed that are also not in Wikipedia, as well as some North American ones, all of whom have had TV series. I am quite happy to take constructive criticisms of my article, just getting a little tired of the allegations made against people who have actually heard of the Magic Dudes. I obviosuly think the article should stay, so I am happy to make changes that people suggest (already took out some rumours and also fixed the caps etc etc as mentioned by other people). You will also note I have asked Sasquatch for his input.MagicFan 03:33, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable magicians. For their first notable trick, perhaps the Dudes can make the sockpuppets disappear. carmeld1 06:41, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete non notable magicians. JamesBurns 07:00, 11 July 2005 (UTC)

ARTICLE REWRITTEN: Hope nobody minds, but I read all the comments, read the cries for help and looked at all the links. All rumour, promotional type material and awkward history has now been completely rewritten. The article now only talks about what the Magic Dudes HAVE achieved, deletes reference to any potential vanity material (i.e. their DVD which they may or may not have produced themselves) and diminishes the emphasis on their starting role on Channel 31 and instead emphasises that this was were they started, not where they are now. I hope that this appeases both camps (i.e. KEEP and DELETE). I don't know why anyone else didn't think of this before they tried to discourage all the newbies.

    • The issue at hand isn't the formatting/wording of the article, its the content and its notability. Until further notability is established, it honest doesn't matter if you rewrite it or not. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 22:17, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP: When my children and their grand children years from now want to see an encylcopedia which shows pieces of todays history in the making, all I can say is I hope they get to see The Magic Dudes. When I have a noteworthy addition to make regarding my own achievements, I will add them to Wikipedia! Thankyou.

p.s. After reading some of the previous vote comments, I feel we need defined specific selections to choose from that will put a Delete or Keep vote in a specific category. These statements should also be verified by a trusted third party as accurate and relevant before they are published here.

    • Unsigned by user:61.68.249.210 and the only edit - Skysmith 11:57, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP Are you allowed to vote if you are new? I don't have many entries so far as this is my first day. If I am allowed to vote, I say keep. I have seen these guys on television and they are really funny and really good. They have a cool animation at the start of their shows which is so funny. Kids love it and just want it played over and over. I have all their DVDs. Do they not appear on TV overseas? I don't know if this is the forum, but I am trying to put an entry in Wikipedia on the Doug Anthony All Stars. Does anyone know where I can find more information on them? Thanks. Magic Dudes are excellent :-) P.S. I even have a picture of the Magic Dudes, but it is a photo with their web site address on it so I thought that it probably wasn't suitable for the encyclopedia based on what is written above. Ally G 10:17, 11 July 2005 (UTC) (Account creted today [User contributions|contributions] Skysmith 11:57, 11 July 2005 (UTC) They had actually mentioned that in their message.
  • Delete - fan sockpuppet/meatpuppet invasion, vanity, poster child for speedy deletion policy update. The more time this article stays up, the more mirrors will absorb it - Skysmith 11:57, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • QuestionTo those who have seen The Magic Dudes on other stations than 31 - which other stations and when?--Porturology 13:16, 11 July 2005 (UTC) Ten or GTV9????
  • To the person who rewrote the Magic Dudes article... Thanks. I guess I am starting to see what people were saying. The rewrite makes more sense. I guess that will teach me that you need to put more effort in than cutting and pasting from a web site. Do any of the fans have an email address that I could write to the Magic Dudes and get more info? MagicFan 13:28, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. Upon inspection, the http://www.magicdudes.com (and old address [13]) website seems to be a potential magic supplies retail store, more than anything else. It's being listed as such on several magic store directories: [14],[15],[16], [17] So they're simply using Wikipedia for advertising. --Madchester 14:46, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Hi Madchester, they were definitely on TV as I've seen their show too. I also did a Google search and I think the links you are talking about are old. There must have been a previous owner of the URL as the Magic Dudes aren't a shop, they are an act. If they were a shop, it would be a pretty crud shop as they don't sell anything. Michael Douglas 14:54, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
It's interesting how a Google Search only reveals "The Magic Dudes" stores, but never a show of the same name. --Madchester 15:06, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Proof that the delete voters don't know their notable from not notable magicians. The same guys delted Richard Sanders from Wikipedia. Richard Sanders has had TV shows in North America, appears with Jay Sankey, delvelops magic with Jay Sankey and gives lectures on magic. The same people trying to delete the Magic Dudes say Jay Sankey is notable, but delete Richard Sanders. By the same token, they leave Magic Joe in Wikipedia. It is becoming very apparant that certain individuals here just go around deleting other peoples articles without doing any research into what is notable and what isn't. If you don't know anything about magicians, then why are you making decisions regarding which ones are notable? Previous unsigned comment by 203.54.40.161 (talk · contribs). --Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:31, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
    • Where? I checked the delete log and the only sanders that was deleted was [[Category:Sanders]]. Plus, there is still a Richard Sanders page about a character actor. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:31, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • www.magicdudes.com doesn't look like a shop to me. It looks like a website under renovation.Previous unsigned comment by 203.54.40.161 (talk · contribs). --Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:31, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • They didn't look like a shop on TV or DVD either. First time I've seen a shop do magic :-) They look like two blokes to me. I put their photo up now. Hope that doesn't break any rules. People who have been on Wikipedia a long time seem to be rude to new people. Ally G 15:29, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually, it might be an image copright violation see WP:CP. Ask yourself this a) did they release it to the public? b) did you take and edit the picture yourself? or c) would it count as fair use. I don't see fair use applied here, so i suggest you find a corresponding tag. Please read more on Wikipedia policy before making contributions. It makes everybody's job a lot easier. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 19:36, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
I reported the pic for a possible copyright violation earlier today. --Madchester 19:39, July 11, 2005 (UTC)
  • I did a scan back through edits to the List of Magicians and Richard Sanders was deleted twice. Once by Postdlf and once by Android79, both of whom feature as negative voters on this page and both of whom obviously know nothing about the magic community.
    • Two different things. Just because someone was removed from the list does not mean their article was whacked. As stated above, we do have an article on Richard Sanders, the actor. If you guys want to make a NPOV, non-spam/vanity article on the magician, click on Richard Sanders (magician) and have fun with it. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:29, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Why delete him from the list in the first place? Bizarre behaviour.
  • Web hits for magic dudes
      • despite what Zscout370 says, the home page did come on top on all searches as listed below and it didn't mention a shop or anything for sale
        • I agree that the home page came out on top, which mainly just displays a logo on a white background. Most websites that had linked you belonged to magic shops or a list of magic websites. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 01:04, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
    • number one in Google if you search for "magicdudes" rather than the+magic+dudes
      • I get a spelling error, 6-7 unique hits, out of tweleve, all for a magic shop. [19]. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:49, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
      • I used just the single word magicdudes and they came out on top
    • number one entry on NineMSN if you just do a search for "magic dudes" which adds weight to the argument they are well known in Australia at least
      • 72 hits, most are just mentioning the website via links from other shops. [20]. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:52, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
    • number one entry on MSN using "magic dudes" (maybe Google isn't the be all and end all that I thought it was)
      • 70 hits, same as above. [21]. Just for fun, I did a Google search on myself: [22]. Look, my homepage comes up on top or my mention in Flags of the World website activities. However, do I have an article here: no, though I get more hits than all of those, combined. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 00:55, 12 July 2005 (UTC) lets all go and wave a flag for Zscout
    • You do realize the only reason they're listed is because they have the most relevance to the search query... doesn't establish notability at all... type in "joystiq" and it'll point you to joystiq.com first... Its the number of unique hits that establishes notability. Sasquatch′↔Talk↔Contributions 03:18, July 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. They're on the road, they were on TV, they're known enough to be so frequently voted on, meets my standards of notability. Almafeta 17:05, 12 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.