Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Very Tasteful

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. - brenneman {L} 07:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Very Tasteful

Notability/importance in question. Appears to be a group of three independent filmmakers. The group members have contributed to other projects that may be of certain note, however Very Tasteful Productions does not seem to warrant an article. Here are their ghits: [1]. Alexa rating for their site 1,101,477. Company's IMDB page: [2]. Only one of the three productions listed has any votes/comments at all, and that one only has 5 votes. — NMChico24 22:48, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. --Bigtop (tk|cb|em|ea) 22:50, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete A 7-minute short doesn't make it for notability. Fan-1967 22:55, 23 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. -- Gogo Dodo 00:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete Just because they don't hold significance for you doesn't mean they don't deserve a page. They've been featured in magazines that I read and on sites I frequent. -- JohnWilliams713 00:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
    • If you could provide links to notable magazine articles, that would be helpful. — NMChico24 03:45, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
      • MacAddict and MacWorld magazines are two of the most notable publications for Apple and Macintosh related stuff. I don't have links off hand because I read them in an actual printed magazine. They've also been considered for the pilot episode of the eBaumsWorld television program that's going to debut on the USA network. — JohnWilliams713 00:26, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
        • I was unable to find anything relating to Very Tasteful Productions on either the website for MacWorld or MacAddict. As for the eBaumsWorld television program, I did find this release from the eBaumsWorld website, however it doesn't mention anything about Very Tasteful Productions. — NMChico24 05:11, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Very Tasteful has 3 films listed on iMDB, not 1. Also, their short films have been broadcast nationally on CBC many times, including ZeD television, CBC's On Demand, and more recently on Sketch with Kevin McDonald. They also wrote the theme song for Hope is Emo, and extremely popular podcast.— GaryFrill
    • Is this a sockpuppet? User:Gary Frill shows newly created, and this comment (made 10 minutes after account creation) is his only contribution. If you create accounts solely to make duplicate votes in an AFD discussion, they're likely to be ignored. — NMChico24 05:01, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
      • I'm not a "sockpuppet". I am a fan of Very Tasteful, and was pleased to see an article on Wiki about them. I feel this article is credible, well written, and(more importantly) valid.— GaryFrill
        • I find your claim of being a distinct user from JohnWilliams713 dubious, since you have the exact same writing style, and jumped straight to this discussion 10 minutes after your account was created. Most new users don't start out in AFD. — NMChico24 05:24, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
    • In response to your comment about Hope is Emo, I have pointed out that individual members of this group have participated in notable projects, however there is still no mention of this particular company. Therefore, it doesn't warrant an article. — NMChico24 05:22, 24 July 2006 (UTC
      • Please refer to the official website of Hope is Emo. Very Tasteful is linked on the mainpage as well as at the end of every video so far in the series. Please by all means exercise more thorough means to determine the credibility re: MacAddict (I don't know about MacWorld.. I am only familiar with MacAddict). If you are able to research this submission thoroughly, you will be able to confirm these details with the respective editors of those magazines.— GaryFrill
        • Of course there's info in the Hope is Emo page about this company. The author of Very Tasteful put it there. — NMChico24 06:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
          • You misunderstood, please refer to the official Hope is Emo site: [3]. As I wrote before, Very Tasteful is linked on the mainpage as well as at the end of every video so far in the series. — GaryFrill
            • I am not, nor do I know Gary Frill. I registered a new account because I have never actively participated in a discussion on wikipedia. In a conversation with Billy Reid earlier this evening, he mentioned that he had a wiki now. I checked it out, being a fan of his work and noticed that it was up for deletion. That led me here. I'm from Atlanta, Ga and I'm a very active member of the Macintosh community. Feel free to google me. You won't find any link to this Gary Frill person. With regards to the MacAddict article, you'll have to find yourself a copy of the April 06 issue. They don't post much of their content online. JohnWilliams713
  • Don't Delete I, too, am a fan of Very Tasteful and think that the work that this group has done is more than enough to warrant a wikipedia page. I personally have seen their mentions in macworld and macaddict. Tobobo
    • Another new user account that only has contributions here, and those contributions were added within 20 minutes of account creation. — NMChico24 06:52, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete I find this introduction to editing on Wiki very confusing and disappointing. I was told of this debate, and have come here to offer my opinion. Is it not valid because I am new? That doesn't make me feel very welcome. When someone has been advised of this situation, are they not entitled to establish an account and advocate on behalf of Very Tasteful? In any event, I support the evidence offered in favour of Very Tasteful Productions. I have collaborated with them in Vancouver, Canada, and can attest to the legitimacy of the above projects. jonbot2000
    • Just because I'm not a regular over at wikipedia doesn't mean I am not credible. You are discrediting an organization many people know and love; of course we are going to come out and fight for the cause. Tobobo
    • User's only edits are here. Tijuana Brass¡Épa! 09:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and what appears to be sock/meat puppetry. Ryūlóng 08:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, fails WP:ORG. Sock/meatpuppets need to be dealt with. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 08:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete If the thrust of the deletion request is solely that Very Tasteful is too obscure, then I disagree. They're certainly not well known but I think they have sufficient presence to warrant inclusion on wikipedia, I've heard about them right down here in the antipodes, again through the online Apple community. What's the harm in allowing it? --Benightedbastard 08:57, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Reeks of vanity. We'd rather you make some nice edits to other articles than creating a complete article with a somewhat interestingly detailed bit about your group. The fact each of the members histories are clearly known and its all cleanly documented. I'm doubtful any of this could be verified by reputable sources, because the sources are likely the members themselves, writing about themselves. I mean, "They all grew up in Victoria, BC and met in high school. Billy Reid finished film school in 2003, and is the most versatile member of the group.," that's an unlikley sourcable statement. Its all self-vanity sadly, by virtute of impossible knoledge through anyone but the group themselves as they don't appear to be that fameous in any place I can tell. If you guys are filmmakers, perhaps you do better off to write about stuff you know. One of you likely graduated from Vancouver Film School, go expand the article a little. (Don't list yourself as notable alumni though, you likely aren't yet if this AFD goes for a delete.) If the Billy Reid guy is a composer, he can check out Wikipedia:WikiProject Music. Stop getting your buddies to come here to comment on this, and go improve the wiki elsewhere. Have a nice time on wikipedia. Kevin_b_er 09:06, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Tijuana Brass¡Épa! 09:12, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete I had no idea adding a simple article would cause so much debate. True, I spent some time making it perfect, but should not all new articles be as well thought out? I found all of my information on the members from their website, their podcast, from the MacAddict CD's, imdb, articles online: [4], word of mouth, and their short films. This is not, although I now see how it can be assumed as such, a vanity piece. I simply was excited to start my Wikipedia experience with a well written article. It would be a be a shame to delete it, as I feel it holds merit. Please reconsider.Trish Rules
  • I don't really know what sock/meat puppetry means although I have an idea, but I do find it unfair that my vote doesn't carry the same merit as anyone else here. Yes, I made an account with the intention of defending this article. Why is that frowned upon? I frequent this site, however I didn't think I had to participate in discussions all day long for my voice to count. That seems pretty elitist. and certainly uninviting and I don't appreciate it. Is it because we're fans of the work?? Shouldn't that go towards establishing their notability, not against it? I've never personally met Billy Reid. I'm a fan of his work and we speak online occasionally. I subscribe to their podcast. I own one of their DVDs and I don't believe this article is a vanity piece and I do believe that they deserve an article. Who knew the politics of Wikipedia were so cut throat. JohnWilliams713
    • And not that it probably matters, but this will certainly be the last discussion I participate in on this site. I don't appreciate being called names and bring treated like crap. I had no idea this community would be so unwelcoming. JohnWilliams713
      • The primary reason why new users are allowed to participate is that they may have relevant information to offer. The primary reason why their opinions tend to be discounted is when they ignore Wikipedia standards. Overwhelmingly, what we've seen from new users amounts to "I think it should be kept because I'm a fan of it," which has basically no value in the discussion. Fan-1967 14:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Don't Delete I have reviewed this case since my last posting and would like to highlight some issues if I may. There has been a great deal of condescension dished out to new users such as myself which I think is unfair. I acknowledge that our knowledge of the process is cursory, but I'm not sure that it has undermined this process. It is hypocritical to accuse "us" (new users) of acting in poor taste when the advocates of non-inclusion are guilty of the following: not responding to the assertion re: mac magazines (you were encouraged to pursue this by contacting the editors of the magazines, and have not offered to do so); the claim that one person was unethical by creating a false account based on the subjective belief that "they" have similiar writing styles (how is that credible? It feels underhanded. How can that be "sourced"?); Re: Hope is Emo. Have you consulted the official website for that organization? Why have you not contacted this group about this issue? Again, doing so would legitimize the claim. Once again, you have not indicated you have or will do so. If efficacy is the goal of this site, why are you not playing the devil's advocate? Re: notability criteria. It is demonstrated multiple times that this group has a national/international presence. With their films participating in the New York Musical Theater Festival and the Milan Fim Festival as official selections, this is demonstrated. They have also had their work broadcasted nationally in Canada several times. Hope is Emo, a hugely popular podcast on internet, has been viewed over 1 million times on youtube alone. If you take the time to view this popular podcast, you will see at the end of each episode, an acknowledgement of Very Tasteful Productions. I recognize this is a lenghty entry, but these issues need to be raised and addressed for Very Tasteful advocates to accept your assertions that this group is not credible. Please research the above issues, and explain how they do not match the stated criteria. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonbot2000 (talk • contribs)
    • You can only make one "vote". Ryūlóng 18:40, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
      • OKay. Can you help me delete the first one? Do I simply delete it from the edit page? If so, how do I restore my recent entry? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonbot2000 (talk • contribs)
        • You can also not unvote. Your first discussion has been taken into account, as had your second. If the closing admin feels that you made a good argument in either, he/she will take them into account in his/her final decision. And always remember to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). Ryūlóng 20:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
          • And obviously, if you were "told of this debate" then the author or parties involved in the article have posted a link to this discussion on the fan forums or whatever there is. As such, that will further degrade from any chances of this article remaining included in Wikipedia. Ryūlóng 20:02, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
            • I'm getting tired of all these accusations thrown at anyone who comes here to defend the article. How is it "obvious" that there has been a posting on a forum? There are no Very Tasteful forums. Apparently using Google is the only method for research on Wikipedia, and if so, Google this fictional "fan forum". I failed to find any such forum. Also, I'm sure that the other new users were unaware of this four tilde requirement at the end of our edits.Gary Frill 22:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
              • I would also like to reiterate that I wasn't told that this article was up for deletion in my conversation with Billy Reid. I was simply told that he had an article. It was my decision to take part in this discussion. I wasn't recruited to do so. JohnWilliams71366.239.217.42 18:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - Sockpuppets have been taken care of. Iolakana|T 13:58, 26 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Zed is cool, but those films and their producers are not encyclopedic. late night drunken canadian trash art.--Musaabdulrashid 13:01, 27 July 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.