Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurt Schemers


 * 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. &spades;PMC&spades; (talk) 15:21, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Kurt Schemers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Advertorialized WP:BLP of a paid-programming television personality, whose claims of notability are referenced entirely to his own primary source content about himself rather than any evidence of reliable source coverage about him in media. As always, radio and television personalities do not get an automatic free pass over WP:CREATIVE just because their own web presence nominally verifies that they exist -- the notability test is whether media other than himself have given him coverage, not his own self-promotional publicity materials. There's simply nothing here that's "inherently" notable enough to exempt him from having to be referenced much, much better than this. Bearcat (talk) 05:48, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - Borderline as it stands; I see hardly any reliable references. I was going to suggest redirecting but I see nothing notable that it could be redirected to. Deb (talk) 10:51, 15 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - Most marked references have been removed since many citations are no longer readily available on the Internet. And, the remaining references were updated with citations to keep this page from being deleted. Thank you for your input, and please let me know if improvement are still needed. Carvideo (talk) 18:39, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Carvideo
 * The citations that are still present still don't represent reliable source coverage about him in media independent of his own PR. Every piece of web content that exists at all is not automatically a valid or notability-supporting source — notability is contingent on the degree to which the person can be referenced to reliable source coverage about him in media, not just on being able to use his own self-published web presence to nominally verify that he exists. Bearcat (talk) 16:57, 17 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - The two citations given are not own PR. 1) is the public schedule by the syndication group, independent of Kurt Schemers and his media company, 2) references a sample of the actual broadcast media player they built. All other material that Deb request clarifying was removed because the citations were no longer available on the internet. Carvideo (talk) 21:18, 17 May 2018 (UTC)Carvideo
 * Those are not media coverage about him in media outlets unaffiliated with him. Bearcat (talk) 17:20, 20 May 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   07:57, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 10:30, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - Not all citations will be media coverage of a person. The citations remaining are entities not directly managed or in control of him. For instance, TV Guide, would be another example of that - just like the company that syndicates him/show as the citation demonstrates. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Carvideo (talk • contribs) 15:39, 27 May 2018 (UTC)
 * A source does not just have to be "not directly managed or in control of him" to fail to be independent of him. If it has any form of direct affiliation with him at all, then it is not independent of him regardless of who does or doesn't have "control" over what or whom else. And a TV Guide listing which just provides the broadcast time of his show, but fails to contain any content about him as a person, does not establish his notability — it is not about him. You are simply not showing the kind of sources it takes to make a person notable enough for inclusion in an encyclopedia. And given your username and your almost complete lack of any history ever contributing to Wikipedia on any other topic, I don't believe that you don't have a direct conflict of interest yourself. Bearcat (talk) 20:33, 28 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Comment - Believe what you may. I don't have a relationship with Schemers. I install camera systems in vehicles and don't have a lot of time to spend on Wiki or the internet for that matter. His show helped me during a difficult time in my life, and adding to this profile is the least I could do. It's gratitude - some snobbish bores may or may not understand that. If it's taken down, my gratitude goes with it. All the language/citations that were originally in question by Deb have been removed and the way it sits now meets criteria to keep it/not delete.Carvideo (talk) 18:20, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Our inclusion standards are based on whether or not a person is the subject of enough reliable source coverage to clear GNG, not on individual editors' gratitude or lack thereof. Every person who exists at all probably has somebody who's grateful to them for something, but that's not a reason in and of itself why every person who exists would belong in an encyclopedia. Bearcat (talk) 17:40, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:27, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2018 May 30.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 06:15, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. The changes to the article have not improved the wording or added any evidence of notability. I am sorry if the article creator thinks we are "snobbish bores" for believing that gratitude is not a good reason for creating an article, but it does, I'm afraid, show that he/she doesn't understand how this encyclopedia works. Deb (talk) 18:57, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete for lack of WP:RS, secondary sources.  A Proquest news archive search - which will reliably bring up stuff on broadcast personalities of any notability,  brings up page after page of press releases - and nothing else.E.M.Gregory (talk) 19:05, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - poor sourcing in article and I can't find anything substantial with Google wither, reiterating what others have said above. Fails WP:GNG. TimTempleton (talk) (cont)  21:38, 7 June 2018 (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.