Talk:John Doe No. 24

Approval out of AfC
Approving this out of AfC. It was just declined by AngusWOOF, however I disagree with his assessment. A NYT article along with a book written about the subject and a tribute song by a notable musician is more than enough to denote notability. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:17, 28 February 2020 (UTC)


 * This needs to be fleshed out better. If the book has been critically reviewed to cover the case, then that helps. I also found an article that tried to add the name "Boyd" to the person. That Carpenter gave this person attention is also helpful. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:30, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yeah to me the NYT article is the big winner and the book and song are the needed support, I'm not hinging the notability completely on the latter two. The book made the NY Times best seller list, yet I'm not sure incorporating that fact into this article would be appropriate. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:43, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , if the book was a NYT best-seller, that should be included. Another option is to rename the article to be about the book, and then it can have critical reception. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 18:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , Cool, let me pull a reference for that best seller bit and I'll put it in where you marked Sulfurboy (talk) 19:06, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Actually correction, the page summary I saw was deceiving, looks like the story inspired another book (wholly unrelated) that was a best seller. I'll try to find someone better to substantiate the book. Although it being distributed by a university press should suffice if something more explicit isn't found. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:11, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * If the specific book concerning John Doe No. 24 isn't a best-seller, then keep the article at John Doe No. 24. Then the other news articles can be referenced. AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 19:14, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

Move back to draftspace
John from Idegon Can you explain why you moved this out of mainspace without comment when it was just approved by me out of AfC? Sulfurboy (talk) 18:22, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Sure, just as soon as you explain why you approved an article that had not been changed since its last review, which was done by a reviewer far more experienced than you. That article is barely in English and has no place in the encyclopedia as it sets. Did you read it? John from Idegon (talk) 18:29, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , Because the reviewer incorrectly declined it for notability reasons. Both you and I have pointed out that the person is in fact notable. Saying that its barely in English is pretty preposterous. Sure it has spelling and grammar issues, but AfC is not here to fix that. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:35, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I see your comment now. This will need to be moved back to mainspace when the redirect is cleared, per my message on your talk page, spelling and grammar are not reasons to decline an article, much less re-draftify one. Add the appropriate maintenance tags if you wish. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:32, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

No. Two people disagree with your assessment. You are wrong, and I'd strongly suggest you not re-review this. John from Idegon (talk) 18:34, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , I'd appreciate not talking down to me, or suggesting empty threats if I re-review this. That's completely out of line. Sulfurboy (talk) 18:39, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * You are the one out of line here. Everything on Wikipedia comes down to consensus. Essentially, you boldly removed the prior review, which I restored. You've not convinced me you are correct. Provide some arguments other than you are more competent than  or myself or quit wasting time. You are not the absolute authority on anything here, nor am I. But you failed to AGF in re Angus's review and I set that straight. If you've got BRD arguments, make them. And I talk how I talk, and write how I write. I don't care you don't like it.  Grow up. John from Idegon (talk) 18:53, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , I never suggested I was more competent than anyone. Whenever you're over your temper tantrum and want to actually be constructive, let me know. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:04, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm hardly competent, but I agree the article can be rewritten to be a more clear stub, taking into detail the NYT article and the Jacksonville Courier Journal (immediate local paper coverage). But there really needs to be more news and book articles, otherwise this could redirect to Carpenter's album as a single. Mental Floss is borderline. That the book was the inspiration for Rachel Simon's best-seller would be good to include, although the inspiration part was discussed in a press release on Simon's website http://rachelsimon.com/pdf/Dave-Bakke-The-State-Journal-Register.pdf,  and should be better covered with an external article.  AngusWOOF  ( bark  •  sniff ) 19:26, 28 February 2020 (UTC)
 * , Yeah trying to find articles on this is a bit tricky because of the commonality of John Doe, and putting it in quotes with no. 24 is making it to specific and missing a lot I'm sure. To me its still more than enough to come out of AfC as I think it more than likely passes an AfD. I'll leave it up to you to publish/resubmit at your discretion as you're probably the only remaining neutral party here. Probably need to shoot the page creator a message too as I'm sure he's probably confused as all get out by now. Sulfurboy (talk) 19:36, 28 February 2020 (UTC)

This article is now in mainspace. AngusWOOF ( bark  •  sniff ) 22:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion
The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:52, 1 February 2022 (UTC)
 * John deo no. 24.jpg