Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Boerebach


 * 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) 05:24, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Mark Boerebach

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I believe he fails WP:BIO. yes he's made a TV appearance for his ability to remember music but I don't see substantial coverage. the 4th link supplied is dead, and he only gets 2 gnews hits. Wording like this "Bullies tormented Boerebach throughout his school years, which were followed by several years of unemployment.[1] Despite his difficulties, a positive and inquisitive attitude has led to his successful completion of several TAFE Certificate courses, and A Grade passes in work experience projects" is really not relevant. LibStar (talk) 05:46, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- -- Cirt (talk) 06:07, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 17:29, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, I've added some references--looks like a local did a documentary on him that has received attention. Coverage in magazines in addition to his TV and radio appearances. Try a search on Google web for his name and also for ""Rainman Goes to RocKwiz" to find additional sources. The article is rough, but AFD is not cleanup. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:42, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N, WP:V. There really isn't anything here besides he got bullied and later went on a public-TV game show, neither of which is something one might reasonably expect an encyclopedia to cover. Possible WP:COI issues as well. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  02:01, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Question, so with the current sources, you're arguing the subject fails GNG? Seems like he meets the bar to me between articles in magazines and newspapers and an admittedly short documentary covering him. The sources are clearly reliable, and coverage seems pretty significant to me. --Nuujinn (talk) 02:11, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, that's pretty much exactly what I'm saying. The primary issue isn't the sources (although they aren't as strong as you seem to think, see below) but notability.  A very, very, very small number of people are notable for being on game shows (Ken Jennings and Charles Van Doren are the only two that spring to mind, but there are a few others).  This guy isn't even remotely close. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:46, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. After the references that Nuujinn has added, the article clearly passes the WP:GNG, i.e. has significant coverage in multiple reliable sources. What more do you want? Also half the nom appears to be about the wording. If you think the wording is bad or a section is not relevant, remove or refactor it, don't just send the whole article to AfD. Jenks24 (talk) 07:29, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. While I admire the subject's achievements, especially since I am totally blind and am also autistic, the following facts are telling:
 * A Gpoogle News Archive search for "Mark Boerebach" only comes up with two results, one of which is a local newspaper. This is an extraordinarily low level of media coverage, considering that both the quiz show appearance and the documentary were broadcast in 2008. I'm aware that the above search misses some pages, such as "this Courier Mail article and the SBS page (but the latter source doesn't count in my book since it have a connection to the documentary). ThinkBig is not a major magazine.
 * Wikipedia does not have an article about the Anchorage International Film Festival, despite the fact that film is generally one of the encyclopedia's strongest areas. Therefore, his documentary's appearance probably does not confer much notability. Additionally, the documentary does not even have an entry on IMDB.
 * In short, this person's notability as a quiz contestant does not even compare to people like Ken Jennings and Michael Larson, and the article about his Internet radio station was recently deleted in an AFD discussion. Graham 87 08:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment, can you point to any policy that suggests that the subject of an article must compare favorably to other subjects of articles? Or a policy asserting that a subject's notability hinges upon the notability of a film festival at which a documentary about them appeared? A policy that suggests that a documentary about them must have an entry in IMDB (which is not a reliable source and thus does not confer notability), or that deletion of an article related to the subject diminished their notability? WP:GNG points to significant coverage in reliable sources, are you arguing that the coverage is not significant or the sources not reliable? --Nuujinn (talk) 12:08, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The coverage is not significant enough and many of the cited sources are too close to the subject or are of local interest. Basically there aren't enough high-quality sources for this person. As for comparisons: I don't mean that the subject's achievements must match those of other quiz show contestants; I'm trying to show the level of coverage required for someone to be notable just *as* a quiz show contestant. Almost every significant film has an entry in IMDB, so the fact that his documentary does not have one is a major concern to me. It seems that the documentary is used to bolster his notability, to show that he did something more interesting than just appear on a quiz show ... and I'm trying to show why the documentary shouldn't necessarily be used for that purpose. Since the article 2PR FM was deleted, that Internet radio station cannot be used to indicate notability. Graham 87 13:44, 10 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Unfortunately he isn't notable, just because he may have Asperger syndrome and runs a internet radio station doesn't make him notable. RockWiz is a WP:ONEEVENT and is rather trivial. Bidgee (talk) 12:36, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment First of all, I'm not suggesting that the subject is notable because of his appearance on a quiz show. The subject is a disabled person with an unusual ability, a savant, and that is, I think, why he has attracted attention in the press, and I think that coverage is significant enough to meet the general notability guidelines. Please note, if we can trust the WebCite entries, apparently ZDNet, St George & Sutherland Shire Leader and Penrith had a brief articles about him in 2000-2007, before his appearance on the show. For those reasons, I think WP:ONEEVENT does not apply here. The number of google news hits is, as far as I know, not a criterion for notability under WP policy. Yes, I think the documentary counts for establishing notability--SBS is apparently a national broadcasting service, and they aired the documentary. I think they count as a reliable source. I readily acknowledge that if the documentary had never aired, or was only shown at film festivals, it would be a different matter, but that is not the case. That the documentary is not itself notable is not, I think, an issue, as we do not require that sources themselves be notable--there are literally millions of books, articles and journals used as sources on WP that are not themselves notable, but in any case, appearing in WP or IMDB would not establish the documentary's notability because WP consider neither itself nor IMDB reliable sources. Nor do I think the relationship between the subject and the director is an issue, since SBS would be considered the publisher of the information. thinkBIG may not be a major magazine--perhaps I am missing something, but I am unaware of any policy that says that a magazine has to be major to count as a reliable source. The Age is a broadsheet, seems to be reliable enough for this subject. The St George & Sutherland Shire Leader looks to be very local, but I think that's counterbalanced somewhat by the degree of coverage he's received, four articles over 4 years. He's also apparently been interviewed on television and radio. None of the sources are connected to the subject as far as I can tell and there are lots of them, and all of the ones used in the article appear to be reliable. So from my point of view, there's enough evidence that the sufficient sources can be found, if they have not already, to establish notability under GNG, and I'll shut up now and go do some work. --Nuujinn (talk) 01:47, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * It's true that SBS is a national TV station in Australia, but it's quite a minor one. Also, they broadcasted RocKwiz, so naturally they had an insentive to broadcast the documentary. The ABC has far more clout in Australia, but he is not mentioned anywhere on the ABC website, despite the fact that it has archived almost every story it has broadcast for at least the last decade. Two articles in Australian statewide newspapers (The Age and The Courier-Mail - are not enough for me; ZDNet confers a bit of notability, but I don't think it's enough to get him over the line. Graham 87 03:11, 11 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete per bidgee - SatuSuro 03:22, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete: only a smattering of fairly WP:TABLOID local coverage around WP:ONEEVENT, so little in the way of notability. HrafnTalkStalk(P) 07:17, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: interesting story, sufficient sources, thanks to the work of Nuujinn. Good job. DVdm (talk) 23:02, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:INTERESTING is not a valid reason. LibStar (talk) 13:21, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No nead to drag some WP:ESSAYS into this. Please stick with guidelines and policies. DVdm (talk) 15:27, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * BIO's on Wikipedia shouldn't be a brief life story since that is what books are for, BIO's should be detailed description on the a well known person, the achievements as well as controversies but should never be a story. Mark Boerebach is just not notable for Wikipedia, if we allowed to keep the Mark Boerebach article, we could have people who have similar type of coverage have an article. I've been in the media a few times in my life, I've been on TV just to name a few but it doesn't make me notable. Bidgee (talk) 23:20, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I respect your opinion, and understand where you are coming from, but can you point to policy supporting your assertions about what biographies here should be? My feeling is that it is a significant achievement for someone with his challenges to start a web based "radio" station, and he does have a pretty unique talent, and both have been covered in the press. Many people are notable for overcoming obstacles in their lives. Also, I'll point out that we already have articles on people with similar coverage, and articles on people with less coverage, even articles on people with no coverage in reliable sources, and that flow is pretty much going to be unaffected by whatever we do here. GNG is pretty straight forward and clear, as is WP:BASIC. Of course you don't have to agree with me, but I think the subject meets both with coverage spanning a number of years from a variety of reliable sources. Also, if you feel that the article should be trimmed back more to "just the facts", I agree with that--my usual approach is to add material and then come back and trim out the excess, but AFD is not cleanup. --Nuujinn (talk) 23:59, 11 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed I don't think that notability is directly related to number of times having been in the media. Surely Bidgee's notability (or lack thereof) should have no influence upon this subject's notability. We cannot complain about lack of sources, and I just think that this item happens to be sufficiently notable — I guess that's what this inquiry is bound to be about. DVdm (talk) 10:35, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * The whole point is that starting and running a online station (whether it is radio or TV) doesn't add to the notability nor does the amount Australian music chart he remembers. Having a few news stories (most local newspapers) and a minor documentary (had it been a doco done by the ABC [Australia] or SBS then maybe) also doesn't at to the notability. Most radio presenters who should be far more notable don't have articles since they don't have enough notability except for John Laws and Alan Jones who are undoubted notable. Bidgee (talk) 11:08, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I think that the notabily of the subject is —de facto— going to be decided on this page. I think that the subject passes wp:GNG, and you don't. Not much to discuss, really... Cheers - DVdm (talk) 12:09, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No I don't, otherwise I would have said keep and not have stated what I have said above. Bidgee (talk) 12:15, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I believe that according to WP policies, general notability is established when reliable sources provide significant coverage. Bidgee, I'll ask again--you've said "BIO's on Wikipedia shouldn't be a brief life story since that is what books are for, BIO's should be detailed description on the a well known person, the achievements as well as controversies but should never be a story." Can you point to support for that statement in WP policies or guidelines? I agree that the documentary is minor, and I'm willing to concede that SBS is a minor national network, but where in policies or guidelines does it say that such are not reliable sources, not verifiable, or fail to establish notability? --Nuujinn (talk) 17:42, 12 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment: The subject of this article has edited Wikipedia under several accounts in the past. Please see this ANI discussion, which is how I found Mark Boerebach's article in the first place. Graham 87 01:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I've been following that discussion. In the interest of full disclosure, if you check his talk pages, you'll note that I've offered to help him, and I found this article the same way as you did. I think it's unfortunate that he's received some fairly brusque handling, but that's understandable given that it took some time to sort out what was happening and what his circumstances are. I have also been following the SPI case, and I believe that both the ANI and SPI have been closed acknowledging both the missteps by the subject and the subject's good faith. Since I work with some folks with mild Asperger's, I'm familiar with the problems they face in social interactions, and I'm not surprised at how things unspooled. That being said, I'm not sure any of this is relevant to the discussion here at this point--could you clarify why you believe his situation as a WP editor is relevant here and now? --Nuujinn (talk) 01:43, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I just thought it was worth noting that discussion here for the sake of transparency. Graham 87 02:25, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. Multiple sources in significant media outlets, passes WP:GNG.--Arxiloxos (talk) 01:55, 13 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: The article under discussion here has been flagged for rescue by the Article Rescue Squadron.  Snotty Wong   soliloquize 19:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - The coverage provided is not convincing me that this individual is notable per WP:N. This appears to be a WP:ONEEVENT situation.  Also, it appears that someone has been attempting to boost their coverage on Wikipedia recently.  Note that 2PR FM (the internet radio station that this person is associated with) has been deleted 4 times so far, with the most recent AfD ending just a few days ago.  Snotty Wong   soliloquize 19:46, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Snottywong, yes, regarding the subject, we've covered that ground, and Mr. Boerebach has been anointed in the blood of the lamb and absolved, let us pray he sins no more against the church of Jimbo. More to the point, do you see any evidence that he's had any influence on this article? And if not, what relevance does his situation as an editor here have to do with the notability issues here at AFD? And which WP:ONEEVENT do you mean, the founding of the internet station, the initial coverage in the local press about his desire for a job, or the documentary and appearance on RocKwiz? --Nuujinn (talk) 23:54, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't have any hard evidence that he has had an influence on this article, however the article was created by a WP:SPA. See Special:Contributions/Saltless-ocean.  Maybe he's just a die-hard Mark Boerebach fan who was angered by the lack of Wikipedia coverage of his favorite 70's-80's pop music internet radio disc jockey?  Perhaps Saltless-ocean should be added to the sock investigation just to be safe, since I don't see them at the SPI or ANI discussion.  The relevance of the topic is evident at WP:COI and WP:AUTO.  As for WP:ONEEVENT, I'm referring to his appearance on the game show, which received some brief local coverage.  As far as I can tell, having a desire to get a job is not notable, and purchasing some software to stream music over the internet is not notable (as evidenced by the previous AfD on 2PR FM).  I'm not saying that the argument about his notability is black and white, but I happen to fall on the not notable side of the argument.  Snotty Wong   confess 22:40, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, you have a right to your opinion. But I will point out that the SPA last edited in 2008, and the article has been substantially retooled since then. You could add Saltless-ocean to the now closed SPI, but I would wonder what the purpose would be, since WP:COI and WP:AUTO related issues can be cleansed, and I think they have been. If you think there are still NPOV issues, we can certainly address them. The interview about the job was local, but a plea for employers to consider people with disabilities, a human interested piece. Purchasing software to stream audio is not notable, but I suggest that coverage for starting an internet based station in ZDNet and a newspaper are. And the coverage regarding the game was somewhat brief, but SBS is a national broadcaster, and was covered by major newspapers in Sydney and Melbourne, and not confined to local news outlets as you contend. --Nuujinn (talk) 22:53, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I certainly won't make a request to add Saltless-ocean to the SPI case, as I agree it would be pointless. However, we'll have to agree to disagree about the notability issue.  Snotty Wong   confer 00:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Certainly fair enough, --Nuujinn (talk) 01:01, 15 December 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.