Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baye McNeil (2nd nomination)


 * 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 and no indication one will emerge after a month. Star  Mississippi  20:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Baye McNeil
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I came across this article and found it contained a lot of problems (Too one-sided, rely on self-published sources and notability issues). I actually took a couple days trying to improve it but the problem still exist after I edited it couple times.

There are several problems with the subject Baye McNeil.

(1) The subject have problems with notability. He basically is a blogger, self-published book author and part time columnist (Mainly The Japan Times). Although he wrote several pieces to more well-known news media like The Washington Post, I dont think it's notable enough to have it own page. The only thing he did that could be considered somehow notable is his involvement in the 2018 Fuji TV "Blackface" incident. But his involvement was mainly just wrote some op-ed to protest and some of his remarks was picked up by some US news media. Although the subject name pops up here and there in some big media coverages, almost all of them are just asking his thoughts about Fuji TV "Blackface" incident. Most of the other news pieces that include him were just like that. Other than that, he is, to put it mildly, a nobody (Except his remarks last year cause some backlash in Japan).So I think he fails WP:GNG

(2)This entry seems relies heavily on self-published sources or interviews about himself, which is not reliable sources.The whole "Early life" basically came from his self-published books, his blog or interviews with the subject. Almost all of them were subjective. I already cut out quite a few paragraphs that were poorly sourced. Like the previous edits claimed he is a lecturer in couple Japanese Universities but all I found is the subject posted some pictures with seemingly students in it. I couldnt found any official records from those universities. So it's almost impossible to tell if he is a lecturer or just some guy who happened gave out a speech in those places. The editor Ray Jameson, who created this page, also included a section name called "Ariana Miyamoto and Naomi Osaka" but the whole section just talked about McNeil had wrote some columns about them and gave out his personal opinions, which is hardly worth metioning in a wiki page. The whole previous page seems more like a self-promotion page as most of the things there were overwhelmingly positive and the used of words were quite subjective. I already tried to clear out this problem and balance both opinions but I think it's worth mentioning here.

Someone97816 (talk) 19:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PhantomSteve/ talk ¦ contribs \ 13:58, 22 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 04:30, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Someone97816 (talk) 19:46, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:30, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:30, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep But very weakly. I agree with the issues of most of the refs being WP:INTERVIEWs and self-published sources, but a GNEWS search, along with results of his work for The Japan Times, brings up non-interview articles where comments from him are cited for topics besides the Fuji TV incident, especially on Naomi Osaka. That would not be a strong enough case, however, and he needs a lot more nontrivial coverage about himself for my !vote to be stronger. 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 03:21, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I checked those articles where his comments were cited but every pieces are the same quotes(Chinese and English alike) How about we put his opinions on the Naomi Osaka page instead of having its own page? Seem more fitting that way.Someone97816 (talk) 15:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I for this article being merged into that section as well, or maybe an article about the Fuji TV blackface incident where his involvement can be discussed there? 👨x🐱 ( Nina Cortex x Coco Bandicoot ) 16:51, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Agreed. I think a section named "Controversy" in the Fuji TV page explaining this incident would be just fine. This incident did not last long nor really that "noticeable". I doubt that it would have much contents and sources for its separate standalone article.Someone97816 (talk) 17:28, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep For western ex-pats (and possibly also non-western Black ex-pats) in Japan, at least those of my "generation", McNeil is something of a household name, and while I don't think being relatively famous within a certain small community merits a standalone Wikipedia, nor do I find the fact that he is frequently cited in articles running in The Japan Times (his "employer" in a manner of speaking) compelling, but excluding those results still leaves a number of articles on Naomi Osaka, etc. in various international papers. However, I do think that we should be more vigilant about this article's content and cut anything that can't be attributed to a reliable secondary source, as was done some years ago with Debito Arudou; if, once this is done, the article turns into a permastub, then we can probably come back here, or perhaps someone could boldly redirect it to Japan Times (since, unless I'm mistaken, most of the time someone cites him they are citing something he wrote for that paper). Hijiri 88 ( 聖やや ) 06:31, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment I see. How about create a section on the Naomi Osaka page, explaining the incident and include his opinions in it instead? Seem more fitting.Someone97816 (talk) 15:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete/Merge Fails notablilty and full of unreliable sources. As user HumanxAnthro above point out, the Fuji TV incident should be merged into that section of the Fuji TV page instead. The subject need a lot more nontrivial coverage about himself to have a standalone Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Someone97816 (talk • contribs) 17:47, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment It seems like three of us agreed that the subject is not specially notable and most sources about him are unreliable. The subject's commentary about the Fuji TV "Blackface" incident and Naomi Osaka were sought out by some media outlets but that's about it. User HumanxAnthro and I both agreed merging his remarks into the sections of repectively articles insteads would be a better ideas.Someone97816 (talk) 16:37, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Is this a promotional page or an attack page? It seems both at once. I invoke WP:TNT without comment on his notability. Ifnord (talk) 18:41, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * CommentIf u look back those early version, it's definitely feel like a promotional pageSomeone97816 (talk) 01:21, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Weak keep The article needs cleaning up to tone down the possible self-promotion, but it already includes sourced information critical of him (thanks in part to Someone97816). It also includes citations of articles in major media that introduce him such as the NYT. Further searches see him on the BBC, Reuters , Christian Science Monitor , etc. He's also appeared on news shows in Japan (as noted here: ). For reasons beyond just the 2018 incident he has become for major international media a go-to person for commentary on the place of Black people in Japan. You also see him giving invited talks at universities and academic conferences on the subject:    etc. He has, in a sense, become an authority on the subject. Given that his commentary has gone beyond any one incident, it makes no sense to merge this with any one incident. Michitaro (talk) 05:52, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. Looks like it contains some weasel terms, like "early interest." Also, looks like an advertisement. -- I.hate.spam.mail.here (This is YOUR page) (talk) 22:41, 29 December 2021 (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.