Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bobby Friction


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) &mdash;  Yash [talk] 03:26, 4 January 2013 (UTC)

Bobby Friction

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Relentlessly promotional and when I try to strip out the promotion, I just can't convinced myself that we need an article on this person. He's mentioned in the media by virtue of being a DJ for the BBC, but do we truly need articles on all BBC disc jockeys? &mdash;Kww(talk) 20:22, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Generally speaking, I would say yes, we need articles on all disc jockeys on national BBC stations. There's plenty of coverage of him from a GNews search, and he won a gold Sony Award for his show with Nihal, so he's definitely notable. --Michig (talk) 06:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Question: We disagree a lot, but at least we usually are dealing with the same facts. Google News returns precisely 1 hit for "Bobby Friction"": http://bollyspice.com/52667/the-deols-talk-to-the-bbc-asian-network-in-an-intimate-in-conversation which reports that he interviewed somebody else. A standard Google Search returns a myriad of mirrors of our own article plus some BBC promotional material. What else are you seeing that I don't?&mdash;Kww(talk) 17:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * For example from the first few pages of archives: MTV, Sikh Times, Sunday Leader, The Guardian, The Sun, Sunday Observer, from GBooks: India Today, The Ashgate Research Companion to Popular Musicology. From a Google search: Metro, The Guardian. And then we have tens of BBC articles to use for verifying basic facts. Not an exhaustive search, but there's plenty out there. --Michig (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * What a delightful user interface: "At any time" doesn't include "in archives" on Google News. OK, more news than I saw. Still a fairly minor personality, and I will hold my opinion that the current contents of the article are bad enough to justify deletion so that someone else can start from scratch.&mdash;Kww(talk) 18:20, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, the Google interface keeps getting less intuitive. I don't see major issues requiring a rewrite, just copyediting and better sourcing. --Michig (talk) 19:19, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. In December 2012 he appeared on an edition of Celebrity Mastermind, so it would appear that he has some claim to being regarded as a celeb and hence is of sufficient importance to merit the article staying put. I would agree that the article is too promotional in its current form, but that does not mean that a properly rewritten article about the man shouldn't be on Wikipedia. I vote to keep it Martyn Smith (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep. Plenty of GNews coverage, plus a major award for his show. I'd say he is notable. — sparklism  hey! 09:01, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with Michig. Furthermore, per WP:ANYBIO he has been the recipient of multiple awards. Mkdw talk 07:52, 3 January 2013 (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.