Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheeks (Multimedia Artist)


 * 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. Cirt (talk) 07:37, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

Cheeks (Multimedia Artist)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested prod - possible autobiography/advertising page for a performer of questionable notability. As the previous attempt at PRODing the article stated, ror all of the information here, this person fails WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:MUSIC. Subject claims to have graduated from Second City, but the alumni list he provides does not include him. Article is loaded with references, but nearly all of them appear to be blogs, YouTube links, Twitter posts, or primary references to sites associated with the artist. The only link even approaching a reliable source (the New York Times article) doesn't even mention Cheeks by name in the article.TheRealFennShysa (talk) 00:19, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete: My original prod concern "For all of the information here, this person fails WP:ENTERTAINER and WP:MUSIC. For all of the sources here only one, the New York Times article, is a reliable source and Cheeks is not even mentioned by name in the article." This article also suffers from Cheeks in a conflict of interest having written the entire article about himself. Aspects (talk) 18:03, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The efforts to improve this entry to make it as accurate and reliable as possible by TheRealFennShysa are well intentioned.

In reference to comments made by TheRealFennShysa above:

WP:ENTERTAINER


 * The editor apparently misunderstands the difference between a "graduate" of Second City and an "alumni". While the artist did complete training and perform in a graduate show at the Second City Conservatory Training Center Los Angeles according to the reference links in the article, the article does not make the claim that he is an alumnus. Alumni of Second City are qualified as such after performing on a Second City Main Stage, which exist in Chicago, New York, and Toronto.  The alumni sources were attached to the names of alumni who had performed on these stages and not to the artist in this article.


 * The editor states that "the only link even approaching a reliable source is the New York Times." This appears to be a generalization, considering the Artist's IMDb listing http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2328077/ including credits as performer in both movies and television, as well as credits in production.  These entries include Side Effect (2008) (multiple award winning short from the American Film Institute) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1215917/fullcredits Lushes (2009) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1391605/ Dreamkiller (2010)http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0818098/ and the MTV series "Why Can't I Be You" (2006) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0832831/.

In reference to comments made by Aspects on Talk:Cheeks (Multimedia Artist):

For WP:ENTERTAINER, there are no reliable sources to show he has a significant cult following. His MTV role fails because the show is not a notable television show. Aspects (talk) 18:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Cheeks likeness and participation on "Why Can't I Be You" is verifiable directly from MTV here http://www.mtv.com/videos/misc/96318/quickie.jhtml#id=1535624.

It would seem a show that aired 4 years ago and yet still maintains a presence on MTV is certainly noteworthy.

For WP:MUSIC, Amazon and iTunes are not national music charts, see WP:BADCHARTS. I would think Side Effect is a non-notable film and nothing in the sources says it is the theme, just an original song. Aspects (talk) 18:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * The artist’s second EP debuted at #7 and climbed to #3 on iTunes Electronic charts http://img7.imageshack.us/img7/7918/picture2kjn.png on its first day of release, September 1, 2009. iTunes charts are considered reliable sources by all music industry reporting resources including Billboard. If iTunes is not considered to be a usable reference on Wikipedia due to unreliability, it should not be listed on its own page within Wikipedia. The inclusion of iTunes within Wikipedia appears to be in direct contrast to the argument. Amazon is not listed on WP:BADCHARTS and is also included in the article as a secondary with a reference via screen capture at http://www.cheektopia.com/forum/topics/glambition-on-the-charts. Due to the ephemeral nature of the internet, these listings may be captured and reassigned to an external link for later reference, but have no less validity as fact.


 * It is curious that you think a film released through the American Film Institute's prestigious Directing Workshop for Women (whose alum includes Maya Angelou and Anne Bancroft) that has won multiple international awards is not a notable film. For starters, here is the schedule from the 2009 ComicCon Film Festival Official Website. http://www.comic-con.org/cci/cci_iff_thu.shtml. ComicCon is one of the largest and most recognized genre festivals in the world. Side Effect was also the Grand Prize Winner of the Oldenburg Film Festival. http://www.screendaily.com/side-effect-takes-best-short-film-award-at-oldenburg/4040949.article This information can also be corroborated on the Wikipedia page for Filmfest Oldenburg.


 * The title of the movie is Side Effect. The title of the song is Side Effect. There are no other original songs credited on the film. It would stand to reason, it is the theme. If you'd like to play semantics, perhaps it should be referenced as the "title track"?

For the five reliable sources, IMDb is not a reliable source since anyone can add information to it. iTunes is not a reliable source. Rolling Stone and MTV are not used as reliable sources in the article so I do not know why they are listed here. I have already mentioned that New York Times is a reliable source, but Cheeks is not mentioned by name in the article. Aspects (talk) 18:00, 11 February 2010 (UTC)


 * "Anyone can add information to it" This is the exact same model as Wikipedia. Is Wikipedia then, not a reliable source in its own eyes? Of course not. Information is cross referenced, verified, and fact checked. A clear list of guidelines and procedures that challenge the legitimacy of projects before their addition to the database (much like Wikipedia) can be found here http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?titletopfaq. Secondly, if it is not a reliable source, why is IMDb used as a reference on the IMDb Wikipedia page? Certainly IMDb is much higher profile article than Cheeks and would have received more scrutiny were this truly an issue.


 * It is public, verifiable knowledge that Cheeks was "the man" in the photographs that surrounded the Adam Lambert scandal. His image also appeared on the Bill O'Reilly episode mentioned in the New York Times article. To suggest the pictures the article mentions are not of Lambert and Cheeks is a faulty attempt to diminish fact.

In conclusion, while it is true that many of the article’s listed sources are blogs and websites, it is also true that the internet is currently the artist's primary medium. Perhaps the most compelling evidence here is the undeniable volume of traffic, interactions and activity by fans and followers on the various websites associated with the artist. Collectively, this volume illustrates the point that a sizable following exists indicating the artist is noteworthy for inclusion within Wikipedia.

The artist's YouTube Channel http://www.youtube.com/GoCheeksGo (the primary point of dissemination for his work) has received over 370,000 hits. The artist also has 5,200 followers on his Twitter http://twitter.com/GoCheeksGo as of February 11, 2010.

The multiple references and clarity of language in this article indicate that proponents of artist's validity take Wikipedia seriously and wish to make the artist's entry as accurate as possible. Holababy (talk) 03:16, 12 February 2010 (UTC)Holababy — Holababy (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete - I can find no reliable sources providing significant coverage about this person. And I'm going to emphasize reliable, as in falling within WP:RS.  The sourcing in the article are either self-published, or blogs, and whatnot.  And as to the question "Is Wikipedia then, not a reliable source in its own eyes?", the answer is "No, Wikipedia is not a reliable source as the material can be added by anybody".  -- Whpq (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:ENTERTAINER directs us to WP:MUSICBIO which he fails. The title song to Side Effect would only make him notable if Side Effect itself was notable. VernoWhitney (talk) 21:28, 17 February 2010 (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.