Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeff Macpherson


 * 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. (ESkog)(Talk) 17:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Macpherson

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Not notable to warrant own page. Individual is part of a group that has its own Wikipedia entry. See: Tiki Bar TV. Subject discussed and endorsed a biographical stub on Wikipedia during a recent podcast on TWiT. Cioxx 04:35, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom unless the article is greatly improved from its current status by the end of this AfD StuartDouglas 10:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete has some IMDB credits, so more notable than your average internet video "celebrity". But I don't see anything that an article can be really based upon. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  13:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep (note, creator of article) - IMDB entries can be bought, not a good notability test. TWIT by itself is a major media outlet nowadays and per WP:TWIT a keep should be in order.  The article will expand as the podcast is released and the TWIT army views / improves it. -- Tawker 19:38, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - You cannot vote "Keep" on your own articles. Conflict of interest aside, you seem to be confusing the TWiT podcast with the article on someone who has merely appeared on TWiT. Furthermore, the podcast was released on Sunday and it is disingenuous of you to suggest otherwise. TikiBar TV has its own page already. I am reverting the page back to WP:AFD, per earlier nomination. Please take your time to go over the Rationale for Notability on WP:NOT. Cioxx 11:52, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually, you can vote "keep" on your own articles, and people often do. There's certainly no need to be rude about it.  I disagree with Tawker on this matter, but he has every right to vote and add to the discussion. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  18:27, 28 March 2007 (UTC)
 * The conflict of interest would be if I closed this AfD.... which I rarely close AfD's anyways so it's hardly to be a concern -- Tawker 01:25, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What relevance does the inspiration for article creation (re: TWiT episode) have if not created by the subject? Joshua Miller
 * Keep notable in the IPTV niche. --FateClub 19:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * It's what, one sentence? And how many have we spent arguing about it? Ventifax 09:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets notability guidelines: (Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.) He is co-creator of one of the first popular video podcasts, and communicates his expertise as an early innovator with other podcasters in the industry. Serves as a resource to the field of podcasting as evidenced by the TikiBar forum (FAQs forum includes information on hardware, software, and techniques to create their show and by extension for other parties to create video podcasts). The fact that Macpherson is the subject of news articles and is a guest on shows such as TWiT shows notability above and beyond his one podcast show. mancuso 19:49, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Tawker. Jerry 22:22, 1 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per FateClub and mancuso, notable within a notable genre. --Falcorian (talk) 19:03, 2 April 2007 (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.