Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Blakey (music producer)


 * 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. Spartaz Humbug! 07:02, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Michael Blakey (music producer)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Reason Wikitigresito (talk) 22:45, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

Overall, I believe Michael Blakey is not relevant to wikipedia. There was a very long article written on his life, mostly un- or badly sourced and very likely intended to push his prestige and public image a little bit. After deleting everything that is obviously not relevant, the only possibly noteworthy things he has done were music production activities for a couple of famous musicians (especially Engelbert Humperdinck). However, it seems to be that he mostly co-produced the less well-known, 2nd tier pieces of these artists.

Edit: The article has previously been deleted based on broad consensus (WP:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Blakey) for failing notability and has been reinstated under a slightly different name.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MarginalCost (talk) 22:55, 3 April 2018 (UTC)

*VERY STRONG KEEP: Instead of simply deleting stuff from Wiki it's better to improve articles like this. I removed dead links (some of them were erroneously marked dead as the links contained audio interviews) and added a few Hollywood Reporter links to the article where the subject is mentioned as a celebrity manager for Jimmy Connors and Ron White. The same source also clarifies that Michael Blakey was an executive producer for Ron White's comedy album "Ron White's Salute To The Troops" (2011). Moreover I was able to find all the Electra Star links that were previously removed for being dead. Freethinker987 (talk) 16:17, 9 April 2018 (UTC).
 * Keep have restored the full version of the article for the purposes of the AFD to enable proper evaluation which shows in the deleted content now restored that he produced a Grammy nominated album so he passes criteria 8 of WP:NMUSIC Atlantic306 (talk) 17:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you for your input. I also saw this album, it is not a music album, but a compilation of comedy storytelling. Therefore, notability criteria for musicians should not apply. Also, the criterion does not explicitly imply producers as relevant people. I would question whether it applys to co-producers then. Wikitigresito (talk) 17:52, 4 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep This article should not be deleted because: 1. It doesn't fall under any of the Wikipedia reasons for deletion in Deletion policy, 2. It meets the relevant Notability (music) requirements, e.i. falls under criteria 8 and 10 in Criteria for musicians and ensembles, as well as criterion 1 in Criteria for composers and lyricists in WP:NMUSIC. Namely, AllMusic lists him as a musician (drummer) on such famous records as Will to Power by Tidal Force and I'll Be There by Gloria Gaynor. He is also given credit as a composer on numerous famous records by the same music directory 3. Although the article might need further improvement, I believe it is written in a non-promotional manner, majority of the statements are well referenced. 4. The length of the article as well as the facts contained therein only confirm that Michael Blakey has had a long-term career as a musician, producer and composer that dates back to 1970s and that he is still relevant today.Maralon1956 (talk) 18:06, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * I can understand that you disagree with the deletion of this article, as you have been a major contributor over years. 1. and 2. However, he does not meet criteria 8, because as he only co-produced the relevant album, he does not belong to the group of "bands, singers, rappers, orchestras, DJs, musical theatre groups, instrumentalists" (Notability (music)). He also does not meet criteria 1, because there is no non-trivial coverage in reliable sources. Being mentioned on allmusic.com does not contitute coverage. From your arguments, I don't see how he could meet criteria 10. Furthermore, the "famous" song "Will to Power" and its band "Tidal Force" are not notable. "I'll Be There" (please notice that the version you mentioned is not even listed on the wikipage) is also not notable. 3. Additionally, the article is written in a promotional manner, for example, by trying to associate the subject in the introduction with the famous artist Tupac Shakur. Google searches for "Michael Blakey 2pac" and similiar terms produce no relevant results. The previously deleted article was found to be probably self-written, it seems likely that the same applys to this piece. Wikitigresito (talk) 20:47, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * It doesn't matter who has been the major contributor to this article, what matters is whether this nomination for deletion is valid. From what you've posted above I can only see that the nomination was purely made based on personal dislike. I cited AllMusic because it is a reliable global source for music credits, but there are plenty of other databases that list Michael's credits as a musician and music producer. You can check out Discogs, for example, if you're in doubt that his credits are valid . Also, he does fall under the music category as he is a musician/instrumentalist and music producer. Maralon1956 (talk) 22:56, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment I was asked to come here because I took the predecessor article to WP:AFD some time ago. I have inspected the article briefly. It reeks of WP:BOMBARD with a welter of pseudo-references which are not useful references. There may be useful references that meet our criteria, but they need to be validated. Detailed analysis will show that many of those in (e.g.) individual albums should become footnotes and are not references. I think it unlikely that the gentleman has acquired notability in the period since deletion, but have only come here only to comment, not to opt for retention nor deletion. The answer to the discussion is, as always, in the references. Fiddle   Faddle  22:00, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact that he "only co-produced" does not diminish his contribution to the work. Most if not all songs and albums nowadays are created by groups of people, not single composers, producers, arrangers, etc. All successful records only became successful thanks to the people who worked on them, no matter if it’s one person or a creative collective. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 260xx 0:387:8:9:0:0:0:91 (talk) 23:08, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not about being producer or co-producer. His only claim to notability is his affiliation as a producer with a comedy album that has been nominated for a grammy. However, the relevant criterion 8 of WP:MUSICBIO does not apply to producers (no matter whether co- or not), but only to musicians involved. Wikitigresito (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
 * VERY STRONG DELETE: I saw so many references that I thought the accusations of "personal dislike" to be possible. What I find is a  very promotional, and likely COI created or edited BLP  (certainly not contested) article that could be a poster for "what Wikipedia is not". I started looking at references, marking dead links and removing IMDb and Discogs", that a broad community consensus has determined is unreliable, and I got exhausted. Primary sources like ElectraStarMgmt.com (I counted 6), dead links, or inappropriate links not involving the subject or those considered connected to the subject, don't count towards the notability of a person, and further: Multiple references from the same source count as one if attempting to use for notability. It was stated above this article is "written in a non-promotional manner" and I assume this editor missed the New York Times (considered reliable) source titled THE POP LIFE; On the Rise And on Line. While a good article with lots of names mentioned it has a lot to do with $50 dollar a seat tickets, or even better, "two days of lectures" for 800 people at $1,300-1,400 bucks, and the subject is not listed at all (that I could find) and that is a problem with a majority of the references. The Allmusic references (I counted 47) are mostly "all about others" with other references "all about Ron White" (NOTE: I am a Ron White fan). Over 60 of the now showing 80 references do nothing for notability of the subject. I can dig farther on the remaing 20 that would have to be a big change in direction to help notability. Besides, there is so much junk the AFD would likely be over before I could finish.  (See conclusion) Otr500 (talk)
 * Conclusion: Fails WP:BASIC, doesn't currently qualify for consideration under WP:NMUSIC (maybe a stretch of WP:CREATIVE), and fails WP:GNG. The subjuct, while likely notable to his family, fans, some editors, and the circle he and Ron White run in, does not rise to the level of acceptable notability for a BLP on Wikipedia (according to sources) as a "producer" or "co-producer". I think editors and admins are starting to catch on to the trick of recreating articles by simple word changes. I feel this is a way around provided alternatives for attempting inclusion that even sometimes circumvent salting. The sources provided boil down to a lot of refbombing to advance notability. The bombarding of improper sources and questions of COI editing give rise to serious concerns. I am impressed with the ability of new editors (44 and 57 edits) to jump into policies and guidelines like pros, but I also wonder why an established editor would boldly "restore" a previous version, that might be considered improper, just to present it to this AFD? I might have reverted but I don't think this version helps in the discussion and I had already made a lot of source edits that I might kill off before realizing this. Otr500 (talk) 15:53, 7 April 2018 (UTC)
 * — Freethinker987 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Fiddle   Faddle  16:29, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment inspection of the history of the article at this permalink timed after the contribution above by Freethinker987 shows that this editor has made no edits to the article at all, as does inspection of their user contributions. Assuming good faith, perhaps they forget to submit their edits. Fiddle   Faddle  16:41, 9 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment Probably user forgot to save earlier. I clearly see edits by Freethinker987 in edit history now.69.75.187.164 (talk) 22:06, 9 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete I have had the chance to assess this now. I'm surprised it wasn't speedily deleted as recreation of tosh deleted at AFD, but we're past that now. This is WP:ADMASQ backed by WP:BOMBARD. It is not salvageable because the subject fails WP:BIO and all other notability guidelines. Like the first incarnation it is a vanity piece. I'm sure he's a very fine chap, but he misses our criteria.
 * I love the use of big bold capital letters. They do not influence the closing admin one way or another. Since it is not a ballot this will be decided upon the arguments and on the article itself. Since this keeps arising from the ashes, may I suggest salting to seek to prevent yet another discussion over inherently similar re-creations? 16:26, 9 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Internet is a constantly changing space, no wonder a lot of references many times become outdated or expire. It is not a reason to delete the whole article. Let’s revisit some of the bad links. I’ve found a lot of evidence that the subject was a music producer on many charting records. He produced Margo Rey’s “Let The Rain” that was co-written with John Oates, Patsy Cline Duets album featuring legendary talent. Also as a producer he worked with Michelle Wright on the Greatest Hits Collection that became a gold record. I added those to the article, hopefully this will help keep it.69.75.187.164 (talk) 23:24, 9 April 2018 (UTC)

—69.75.187.164 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Otr500 (talk) 01:45, 13 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Michael is a music producer known for his work with plenty of artists, I don’t understand why this is even being questioned. He is also known for breaking new artists, e.g. Brooke Allison, Ashley J, Christine Saade, Ashley Greene just to name a few. Christine Saade's record "Get Together" and Ashley J's "Dare Ya" charted on Billboard, not to mention very well-known acts like Ron White. Michael was an executive producer on his last comedy specials "Ron White's Salute To The Troops" years 2012, 2014, "A Little Unprofessional" that was nominated for Grammy's in 2013. It is all mentioned and referenced in the nominated article, as well as you can find plenty of sources online supporting this. Please do proper research before putting something up for deletion. 76.79.178.211 (talk) 00:18, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Could any of the editors who have turned up here provide any example of independent reliable sources providing any significant coverage of Michael Blakey, rather than just a mention in the minor credits? If I was Blakey I would be very embarrassed by the actions of the people supporting the keeping of this article. It just makes him look like a narcissistic self-promoter. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:04, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep I support keeping this article. Michael Blakey was a producer of Ron White's "A Little Unprofessional" CD and DVD. The album charted on Billboard with peak position *1, was certified Platinum by RIAA and was nominated for a Grammy . There are no sources more reliable than this. It's very hard work and it's so sad when it's criticized or doubted like this for no reason by the people who hide behind their nicknames. Definitely keep.
 * Michael, I avoided mentioning above that this is almost certainly you in a vain attempt to avoid your blushes, but don't you realise how ridiculous you are making yourself look here? Just give up your attempt to include yourself on Wikipedia to avoid making yourself a laughing stock, if it's not already too late. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 20:45, 10 April 2018 (UTC)
 * To further elaborate my point of view: the article falls under WP:PEOPLE, and meets WP:basic, plus meets additional criteria for creative professionals WP:FILMMAKER. If the author failed to conform with Wiki's neutral point of view policy, WP:GD clearly states that the article is "usually remedied through editing for neutrality, but text that does not conform to any of the remaining three policies is usually removed from Wikipedia, either by removing a passage or section of an otherwise satisfactory article or by removing an entire article if nothing can be salvaged." In this case, WP:OR does not apply and most of the sources are verifiable. I see no grounds for deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.196.200.150 (talk) 23:10, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

—173.196.200.150 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. Otr500 (talk) 01:45, 13 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I must note that every IP address associated with a "keep" above geolocates to Los Angeles. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 11:20, 11 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Funny, that's where Blakey's management company is located. wikitigresito (talk) 14:49, 17 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Yes, I had noticed that. It's very sad when someone who has had, and seemingly still has, a perfectly respectable career but nothing to indicate Wikipedia notability demeans himself by insisting on an article. If I behaved like that I would feel an enormous sense of shame, even humiliation, but it appears that Blakey has such a thick skin as to nearly be a rhinoceros. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 18:50, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - while most music producers are not notable, this person appears to pass WP:GNG. Bearian (talk) 00:57, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Could you please point out the independent reliable sources that have significant coverage of Blakey, as required for a pass of WP:GNG? 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:19, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

References cited inline by contributors to this discussion
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: What is required here is more policy based discussion of the source material, and fewer vague assertions of signficance.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (talk) 11:34, 12 April 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Needs more input by established editors and less input by SPAs and IPs.
 * Delete - I can't find a single reliable third party source that would pass muster for WP:BIO or WP:NMUSIC. A lot of the things he has worked on are notable, there is no *significant* coverage of him independent of listing him as a contributor to other plausibly notable works, and notability is not inherited. Having said that, a LA Times Article about the sale of his house notes that Modern Drummer Magazine once sang his praises, but this seems to be regurgitated from trivia on his IMDB page. If that source really exists, I think that might change my mind, but I suspect the IMDB contributor is confusing him with Art Blakey. --Sykes83 (talk) 23:55, 12 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. As far as I can see, after wading through the 86 references in the article and searching outside that, there is no source that has significant coverage of Blakey to contribute towards the general notability guideline and nothing that says that he has played such a major role in any notable piece of music as to pass WP:NMUSIC. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:04, 16 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment This was the first article I nominated for deletion, which is why initially I wasn't very familiar with how to properly check notability. After going through all references and all checking notability guidelines that were quoted by users who "voted keep", I cannot summarize my conclusion about the article better than Timtrent did: This is WP:ADMASQ backed by WP:BOMBARD. It is not salvageable because the subject fails WP:BIO and all other notability guidelines. - wikitigresito (talk) 15:29, 20 April 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   20:45, 21 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:11, 22 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 13:11, 22 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Someone has apparently deleted the comments that had used to mark invalid references, can anybody help me restore these? It's really hard to keep an overview like this, especially with the other references recently added. Also, interestingly, 86.17.222.157 is an IP and an established editor. wikitigresito (talk) 20:32, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Per my yalk page: "Thanks for the ping because I note that maintenance edits I made were "edited out". Two editors, one a SPA and one with two areas in five years (hitting this one hard now), seems to be steering the article. "If it stays it will need protections and over-site.".


 * NOTE: I can't at the present but will seek intervention and closing. We also have SPA's and "sleeper editors" (whatever those are referred to as) that has made nine edits since 2014 with five related to this subject. Removing good faith maintenance tags, especially covertly, can be considered disruptive and warrant sanctions. Not that sleeper editors would mind because they likely have more dormant accounts that can be used. This AFD has been inundated with these kinds of new editors and at best can hope for confusion and a "no consensus" decision but closing admins can see through this. If anyone would like to revert to a previous timeline and undo any either inadvertant or meant to happen edits that is against policy I will support it. Anyone else that would like to ask for adnib help please go for it. Otr500 (talk) 06:39, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Question It seems that various contributors to the article and this discussion are blocked editors, at least some for confirmed or suspected sock puppetry. We have what might be judged by some to be a claque trying to preserve this at all costs, too. I think it is the right time to move from discussion to closure. I see two outcomes. Either it is determined that the gentleman is notable and the article, much pruned of any non cited/citable puffery, is retained, or it is deleted as failing the criteria for inclusion here. I understand why experienced editors have relisted it rather than closed the discussion. Even so I think it is time to bite the bullet of closure. Fiddle   Faddle  19:31, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Reply: It has one more day on the new listing. This is actually a good thing to make sure there was enough exposure. It is contentious and will require an in-depth look before closing and admins are volunteers like the rest of us. I normally would just not worry about it but there is too much stacked evidence that there is under-handed dealings going on and this needs looking at. Riding the coattails of Ron White is not a justifiable rationale for keep. The rebombing of sources and attempts to hide good faith maintenance edits are bad enough. I just randomly picked current reference #57 that is listed as "Engelbert Humperdinck - The Dance Album" that redirects to a totally, totally, totally junk (in other words plain old refbombing junk) reference (check it out and others like it) that has abosolutely zero to do with the subject or even Ron White. The article is full of these All music refs that are just for show to make the article appear to be well sourced. All references to the same source does not add to notability as they all count as one for this purpose. That is an issue I have; faking references to portray notability. Otr500 (talk) 08:25, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete: strongly promotional article on a producer of questionable notability. Notability is not inherited from notable performers / recordings. Best deleted, due to COI / SPA concerns. It would be a time sink to try to maintain neutrality of this article. Since notability is marginal at best, deletion is the best course of action here. K.e.coffman (talk) 20:40, 28 April 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.