Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Best Breakout New York City Artist Award


 * 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   redirect to 2009 MTV Video Music Awards. actually deleted but I added the redirect as requested Spartaz Humbug! 17:57, 21 September 2009 (UTC)

Best Breakout New York City Artist Award

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable rinky-dink award with almost no coverage. It's tangentially attached to the MTV Video Music Awards, but has almost no coverage (all the references in the article are either press releases from the creators of the award, or don't even mention this award). It's so inconsequential, it's not even on VMA's own website--either the list of award winners or the front page. I tried boldy redirecting the article, but another user reverted. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 06:13, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * NOTE: User:Applegigs has been blocked indefinitely as the result of a sockpuppetry case; see Sockpuppet investigations/Epeefleche/Archive. r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 15:42, 20 September 2009 (UTC)


 * The MTV Video Music Awards or VMA's are pretty famous awards that everyone who follows music knows about which mtv gives out. this is a new vma that mtv is giving out (they add and subtract vmas all the time.  it is completely official.
 * I dont know why the deleter calls it tangentially attached.
 * Its clearly an mtv vma award.
 * If you look at the article, or at, you will see the official mtv vma logo with the award.
 * Also the official rules call the award the "MTV VMA Best Breakout New York City Artist Award." what is tangential about that?
 * also this official announcement about it calls it a VMA. and the award was to be given out at the vmas.
 * I really dont see why there is fighting about this. its not like joe's pizza saying a band is the best band on the block.  its mtv saying this a vma for best band in nyc, 190 were considered, and they ended up with three VMA nominees just like the other VMAs.  its a big deal.--Applegigs (talk) 06:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete It didn't air on the actual VMA broadcast, thus it's a non-notable local award which likely only has their presentation aired either using TWC local commercial time on MTV during the VMA ceremony or as part of a local video on demand/public access production. Reading the actual publicity page for the event it seems like the equivalent of an All-Star Celebration venue at the Super Bowl or the NBA or MLB All-Star Games; none of the events at those venues receive anything but publicity attention.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 09:23, 14 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Except that here the award is called a VMA by MTV. And here the award was presented at the VMA ceremony by the host. Thats what I saw.  And thats what the sources say.  And they also say that the winner "was featured on MTV during the live VMAs locally on Time Warner Cable and will be showcased nationally on MTV2"  I don't think the stuff you are talking about is a grammy or oscar or tony that is called an oscar or tony or grammy and given by the host at the real event.  here it is a vma by mtv even on the logo, and the host gave a moonman at the real event at radio city. and read what gillingham said at .  he should know.--Applegigs (talk) 05:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Weak keep Neutral.  We have articles for all the Grammy Awards, including ones that never ever make it on-air such as Grammy Award for Best Zydeco or Cajun Music Album.  Google News has zero hits for either this award or the winning artist, however, so it is pretty obscure.  Wasted Time R (talk) 11:54, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment The difference is that at the very least every Grammy winner is mentioned on-air, even in just the form of quick drive-by text. This local award did not appear within the ceremony that went out nationally over MTV.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 23:23, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's a point. I've changed my stance to "neutral", I think this is a real borderline case.  Wasted Time R (talk) 01:50, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * See what i added above.--Applegigs (talk) 05:20, 19 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. It's now clear that the article was created by Epeefleche, expanded by VMAsNYC and Applegigs, and defended here by Applegigs, all of whom now turn out to be part of one big sockpuppet operation.  This illustrates that the article couldn't survive on its own merits.  If this award ever achieves real prominence down the road, an article can be created then.  Wasted Time R (talk) 00:25, 21 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment. I initially recused myself from this discussion due to personal attacks from VMAsNYC, but now that "they" have been blocked I'll weigh in. Redirect to 2009 MTV Video Music Awards. I'm not sure that it deserve a merge and I don't think it deserves its own article, but if this turns out to be a recurring award that happens every year I could see a legitimate article being created. To that end I don't think the article should be deleted outright, just permanently redirected until sufficient notability for the award is established. ~ Paul T +/C 16:56, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Note, the redirect should point to this section: 2009 MTV Video Music Awards ~ Paul T +/C 17:44, 21 September 2009 (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.