Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cary The Label Guy


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 08:29, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Cary The Label Guy

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Bassist for a number of bands, with their own notability concerns. I was reverted when I redirected this page to his band Fusebox Funk, which I already thought was charitable. Lack of significant coverage for himself in third party sources, mostly it's just mentions for his bands. I prefer deletion but would consider a redirect to one of his bands. ~ Eliz 81 (C)  20:14, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete: COI as well as NN. Does not meet WP:music but beyond that seems to be a conflict if interest going on. Aside from small clean ups to the page I took a look at the user histories of the main editors: Teamxrsx, Otisrsx, IP 75.92.76.62, and IP 96.26.170.142. I see their only contributions to Wikipedia have been to promote Cary and his band. (As an aside you will see Teamxrsx has also had a rather large hand in Fusebox Funk along with Polyrhythmic. (Side note - The Fusebox Funk page was given a CSD on July 7, 2007 but Teamxrsx removed the tag. Another tag was placed on the page July 13, 2007 however Polyrhythmic simply blanked the page. Blanking was reverted but the they removed the CSD tag again. The page was again tagged for CSD on July 10 however seems to have been declined. I see another CSD with a date of August 1, 2007 but not sure where it fits in as it comes up in July) Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:10, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Additional Comments: Just to break down the actual content of the page, COI aside. The methods used to determine notability are described at WP:GNG. It is consistent with guidelines at WP:music which breaks it down further. The basic guideline is, in order for an individual to have their own non-redirect Wikipedia article, a person must have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. On the article in question there is a sub header named "Press coverage". The first four links are to articles in the Florida Times Union and none of them are about the subject nor do any of them even mention the subject, thusly not meeting "sources address the subject directly in detail" criteria. Those links should not even appear on the article page. What follows are links to an Electronic Press Kit (EPK) (that is not for the subject of the article), two links to Warwick on artists who use their products (one is a link to a list which contains Cary Jordan's name and the other is to a short "Artist Profile") and a link to Bass Player Magazine, which will not show you any article on Cary. (However there is a section in the magazine named "Introduce Yourself" in which bass players can write a bio about themselves and submit it. Cary is in that section) Everyone of those fails the criteria based on what is not allowed: Media reprints of press releases, other publications where the musician/ensemble talks about themselves, and advertising for the musician/ensemble. The only other link listed under "Press coverage" is to a website that no longer exists. This whole section does nothing to prove any "Notability" as described in section one of WP:Music: "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." The rest of the article is mainly a repeat of the same "official" links being repeated and placed under different sub-headers. The article does not meet any of the notability guidlines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 15:20, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Cary The Label Guy has a number of third party coverage, including being featured in Bass Player magazines Oct 2008 issue. His band was not covered in that feature, only Cary. Cary is the bassist for several bands and has been on several albums. This article was deemed acceptable for inculsion several months ago. If there is a problem with the article, please let me know so i can fix it. Thank you. --Teamxrsx (talk) 21:26, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: The COI issue is important and there is nothing anyone directly involved with the band or yourself is allowed to do per Wikipedia policies. Also, "featured in Bass Player magazine" is not fully accurate - "featured in an advertisement that was placed in Bass Player magazine" is. There is a huge difference. Soundvisions1 (talk) 22:08, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually, it was a article about Cary in Bass Player Magazine. It's in the Introduce Yourself section of the magazine. There is a Ad as well, although, i'm not sure when that was pressed. What does COI mean? --Teamxrsx (talk) 23:56, 15 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:04, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: Bass Player Magazine, Criteria for being "featured" in the "Introduce Yourself" section: If you’d like to introduce yourself to the bass community, send a 300-word or shorter e-mail to [SNIP] with the subject “Introduce Yourself” and the following info: your name, hometown, number of years you’ve played bass, a description of your main gigs, your bass and rig, day job, why you started playing bass, why you play bass today, a “lightbulb moment” (a realization that changed your playing), how anyone anywhere can hear your music, and where people can talk to you on the Web or otherwise. [SNIP] And to answer your other question: COI = Conflict of Interest. Soundvisions1 (talk) 00:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

That does not matter. The magazine has to pick who they want to feature, right? A feature is a feature. You are arguing semantics at this point. It IS significant third party coverage. Also, where is the conflict of interest? --Teamxrsx (talk) 01:00, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually, your definition is completely wrong. This is not significant.  Significant implies multiple coverage in various 3rd party sources, secondly, this mention is trivial, and isn't even a real article.  Secondly, did you bother to read the entire policy?  Significant third-party sources which are independent from the subject.  This means that in order for this mention to meet WP:N, it must be in a source which is not talking specifically about bass players.  Unfortunately, the single source you provided meets no part of the policy.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 07:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete -- Per my argument above.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 07:01, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Also, regarding removing tags, i never removed any tags. The article was deemed within guidlines for inclusion, so the mods that were handling the article removed the tags. The Fusebox Funk article is not the article in question, so i'm not sure how that pertains to what IS in question.--Teamxrsx (talk) 01:49, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment The point is, Teamxrsx, that you are a single purpose account who appears to be on Wikipedia for no other purpose than to promote Cary and his bands. ~ Eliz 81 (C)  05:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   —Soundvisions1 (talk) 15:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Redirect to the band article. There are no reliable sources to establish notability outside the band.  A self-submitted introduce yourself article isn't something that establishes notability. -- Whpq (talk) 16:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

I have made several edits to other articles, regarding music instruments. To say my Wikipedia account is only to promote Cary and his bands is simply not true. I can understand how this may seem to be the case, but again, i have made other edits with my account. The reason i have not made more, is simply because i don't feel comfortable with wikipedia yet and wanted to spend more time with it before i start editing a ton of articles. About the account "otisrsx"; i forgot which account i was using and accidentally signed in with this account. If you notice, i have only used that account once, then realized my mistake. Also, i am not associated with the band in any way. Say, for instance, the Bass Player Magazine article is not sufficient "thrid party coverage"(which is questionable), the other coverage Cary The Label Guy has received, was deemed sufficient back in July. I have been asking for help on how to make the article better, so please, instead of deleting the article, allow me to make it better, using your recommendations. Back to the Bass Player Magazine coverage. I don't know why a self submitted article should be discounted. There are many, many instances where press releases are used in the media(which are self submitted) that lead to articles and press coverage. This should be no different. The fact is, BP magazine had to pick who and what they decide to cover. They obviously felt that Cary was worthy of coverage, or they would not of covered him in their magazine. I don't know the exact data, but i'm sure they get thousands of submissions. --Teamxrsx (talk) 03:12, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Article appears to be full of flowery language about the subject, little material citation, and a great deal of (self-?)promotional material. I see no serious assertions of notability. ThuranX (talk) 03:54, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Press coverage is completely third party. If Cary had paid for the endorsement to Bass Player Magazine it would be considered self promotion. Does the entry link to the BP magazine article? If so, why is that not considered substantial third party coverage. There are thousands of artists pages..what makes this one different? -p —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.11.10.200 (talk) 18:11, 17 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply Again, a single article is not substantial or significant coverage, as called for by WP:N.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 21:26, 17 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Notice. I have, in reviewing this, decided to file Suspected_sock_puppets/Teamxrsx. ThuranX (talk) 01:25, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

How much publicity does one need in order for it to be a 'significant' amount of third party coverage? -p —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.11.10.200 (talk) 21:01, 19 October 2008 (UTC)
 * More than a single article in a single magazine. Please read WP:N.—  Dæ dαlusContribs /Improve 21:06, 19 October 2008 (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.