Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mikael Johnston


 * 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. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Mikael Johnston

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)



non-notable autobio vanispamcruftisment Wuh  Wuz  Dat  22:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Also, a Google news search for "Mikael Johnston" only gets five results.--Sandor Clegane (talk) 23:01, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * This is completely not true!. There is a ton of relevant articles on me written within the past year from recognized news sources, and yes some dating back the span of my career which has been over 14 years. If you need me to site more examples than the links already provided so far in the unfinished article then I would be happy to. I've seen far flimsier articles written about people who are barely even footnotes in my career and their articles haven't been nominated for deletion. If you would like me to name a few i will. This is preposterous! Obviously you didn't do your research properly. There are literally hundreds of hits under my name in Google! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikaeljohnston (talk • contribs) 23:26, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Really?--Sandor Clegane (talk) 23:42, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge In addl to Sandor Clegane's note's 1 of which isn't him, and the other s4 range between 5 and 14 years old. Nothing recent. Likely fail WP:Notability as they lack significant coverage of him. --Abc518 (talk) 23:08, 15 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Expanding on my position: (Which i'm changing to merge) My nothing recent statement is wrong. Notability is not temporary. However, after a little more research. The news articles likely don't work anyway. See below:


 * [] Fails WP:Notability Section 1. Significant coverage. It's about his band not him.


 * [] (Not free.) From what you can read also appears to lack significant coverage.


 * [] Fails WP:Notability Section 1. Significant coverage. It's about his band not him.


 * [] (Also not free.) From what you can read also appears to lack significant coverage.


 * In reference to Mikael's defense there is 100s of "hits" from google. It's the articles job to back up notability claims, not google's. But I checked the references from the article.


 * [|http://allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=11:kpfwxqljldse~T1] I don't know much about this site, but it looks like it might meet WP:Notability. Can someone please elaborate on this source?


 * [] See above.


 * [] Credits page, number of past work doesn't automatically mean Notability.


 * [] See above.


 * [] Another credits page.


 * [] More credits...


 * [] Possible Selfpub, but about the band nonetheless.


 * [] Looks like a local publication, however it may meet WP:Notability


 * There is obviously some notability, I think there should be more discussion on the sources he does cite, and there should be more added. There is a clear conflict of interest here, whether he admits it or not. It's either an autobiography or somebody close to him is writing this. Both of which are a COI. I don't think this page should be deleted all together. I support a merge with his band's article (Which needs work too), as it seems his band has more notability than him, and his band's article needs content anyway. Mika is your band still active? --Abc518 (talk) 02:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * According to their article, their last album was almost a decade ago.--Sandor Clegane (talk) 20:53, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I am familiar with this artist and can attest that he has been a notable pioneer in electronic dance music. I was able to add to this person's page in regards to current work, and added references that I believe to meet WP Notability standards. I am asking some of my friends in the press to contribute to this article by editing and adding both content and references so that it can further meet WP standards. Please allow some time for this to happen before making a decision regarding deleting or merging this page. M Periera  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mperiera (talk • contribs) 16:11, 16 August 2009 (UTC)  — Mperiera (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Discussions normally last at least a week, so you should have enough time. And please remember to sign your post (correctly) using four tildes ~&#126;. And Welcome to wikipedia. --Abc518 (talk) 17:16, 16 August 2009 (UTC)


 * mikael is very obviously an established bay area artist and producer. all the proof necessary is the releases he has listed at discogs:  http://www.discogs.com/artist/Mikael+Johnston. he has been putting out music and collaborating with well known artists for well over a decade.  --Davidpenner (talk) 18:35, 16 August 2009 (UTC) — Davidpenner (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep Thanks for your welcome Abc518, and I will be sure to use the ~ from now on when signing. I'd like to add my comments Regarding the comments by Sandor about Johnston's references and notability.


 * [] ...Yes this article is about one of Johnston's bands (he has had several artist names to my knowledge). But if you read the article it's clear that almost the entire interview is with Johnston himself. Even the opening to the article establishes this, "It means man's struggle with his own personal demons." Alameda's Mikael Johnston is explaining his band's name..." There are almost no quotes from the other member(s), everything centers around Johnston who is the founder of this project. It's obvious he is the leader and creative force behind this project, or at the very least the public persona based on this interview. This article goes on to say,"By 1993 the duo (Johnston and DeJournette) had launched Mephisto Records with their first song, "Dream of the Black Dahlia." Both the track and label were pivotal in defining the nascent San Francisco house sound." This statement clearly establishes Johnston's notability as a pioneer of San Francisco dance and house music. The SF Weekly is a very well established and respected publication and seems to meet WP:Notability.


 * [] This is the official allmusic.com biography on Johnston. The article talks about Johnston's early to mid career and the reference mentions his work with Jane's Addiction, "As the co-producer and songwriter for Mephisto Odyssey, Johnston has gained the reputation of an eclectic and a great remixer. Indeed, the remixes of "So What" by Jane's Addiction first brought the group to Warner Bros.' attention in 1999." For those who don't know allmusic.com is considered by the music industry to be the official go to guide. So much so that The Grammy committee relies on this site to conclude eligibility for membership and for inclusion in special voting committees. This guide only includes bios and credits for well established and notable people in the music industry. The fact that Johnston is even in allmusic.com under his surname and not just under various band names is a credit to his notability and should help establish his notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. This site should meet WP:Notability.


 * [] This article is indeed free in spite of Sandor's comment, I had no problem pulling it right up in my browser. It's clear that this reference was added to establish proof that Johnston worked as a producer and mixer for the well known cult electro pop duo "I am the World Trade Center." In the article it clearly concludes that fact in the following passage, "The disc is also the first conceived in a studio with, in Geller's words, "a real producer", a former member of electronic-dance band Mephisto Odyssey named Mikael Johnston. Previously, the Athens, Georgia based duo did everything themselves, recording Dykes's vocal parts and Geller's synths at home and then arranging the material on a laptop. "We did one track with him [Johnston] and we were like, 'Holy shit, this is awesome.'" This is another site that again seems to meet WP:Notability.


 * [] This is another article that was referenced in regards to Johnston's work as a producer and mixer for "I am the World Trade Center." This article says, "Working primarily with Mikael Johnston at Temple Music Studio in Athens, Geller says this is by far IATWTC's best album. Mikael's very intense and really took the time to get it right, Once again I can't see anything that would preclude this site from meeting WP:Notability.


 * [] This is the allmusic.com credits page for Johnston. I believe this reference was included to provide proof of claims in the article that Johnston worked as a producer and or engineer on various projects with artists that had been referenced.


 * [] Here we have another article that is only a year old from a well established newspaper that appears to meet WP:Notability. The article centers completely around Johnston and what he's doing in the music industry. The article talks with him about his work past and present with Mephisto Odyssey and other artists, and even talks about him as an engineer and producer with well established artists outside of electronic dance music like Goapele.


 * [] This article is in a publication called Beatportal from February 4, 2009. For those who don't know what Beatportal is I'll explain. It's the publication that coincides with Beatport.com. Beatport.com is considered the itunes of the electronic dance music industry. This publication should be considered to meet WP:Notability as the writers for beatportal are real journalist and industry professionals that are considered experts in the genre of electronic dance music. The article is about Johnston's partnership with world famous DJ Dave Dresden. The entire article is about Johnston and his work both past, present and future.


 * [] This interview with Dave Dresden and Mikael Johnston dated 8 July 2009 is from the Best of House blog. Best of House is considered to be the most credible house music blog in the world by many dance music professionals. It seems to meet WP:Notability


 * [] This article in DMA (Dance Music Authority) dated June 2, 2009 talks about the partnership with Dave Dresden and Mikael Johnston including a mention of their back to back Billboard #1s the duo had earlier this year with their remixes of Lily Allen and Nadia Ali. DMA is one of the longest running publications in the history of electronic dance music and should meet WP:Notability standards.


 * [] This reference is to Johnston's discography on discogs.com which is considered to be a credible source of information in the music industry, which seems to lean heavily in the direction of electronic dance music. I am familiar with this artist and I know this discography to be horribly incomplete but even still it's extensive and spans about a decade and a half.
 * I'm getting a sense that none of you are experts, or even knowledgeable about electronic dance music, it's many sub genre's, or the people that helped shape and define it over the last 2 decades. It is important that these people be documented, they are notable and important people and Johnston is clearly one of these people. It's also arguable that he has established himself as a notable audio engineer and record producer outside of being a dance music pioneer, having worked with acts like Jane's Addiction, Static-X, Smash Mouth, The Sounds, The Matches etc., but I don't believe that to be the main focus of his notability, but it may help to establish him as a notable figure in the music industry as a whole, I'm not sure. There are many references that are good arguments as to Johnston's notability in the area of electronic dance music among the references provided so far, and I'm sure that over time many more can be added (there are 1870 google hits on his name). I've written to several press and electronic dance music colleagues who are familiar with Johnston's work and asked them to contribute to the article. This may take time as these people are busy and have their own priorities, and would have to do this on their own time. I strongly encourage you to take this page off the list of consideration for deletion. I also don't believe that this article should be merged with the Mephisto Odyssey article, as it's only one part of Johnston's career. Also I think I've established a reasonable argument that Mephisto Odyssey was just one of several artist names Johnston has had over the years, Like Seraphim, Deep Red or his current project Dresden and Johnston. Last but not least Johnston's Notability seems to be established far and above many of the articles written about Johnston's colleagues. Yet their pages are not up for deletion on Wikipedia. I would argue that if you Delete Johnston's page you would also have to consider deleting established pages by many of his colleagues that are also pioneers, DJs or artists of notability in electronic dance music. Some examples of this would be Booka Shade, DJ Tocadisco, Ronski Speed, dj garth, Tony Moran, Filo & Peri, Krafty Kuts, Plump DJs, Finger Lickin' Records, Steve Angello, Nadia Ali, Andain, Axwell, Überzone, Christopher Lawrence (DJ), Sandra Collins, Donald Glaude, James Zabiela, Anjunabeats, Solarstone, Steve Lawler, Sébastien Léger, Mauro Picotto, Skazi, Nick Warren, Marcel Woods, Bad Boy Bill, DJ Vibe, Pete Tong, Lisa Lashes, DJ Dan, DJ Hype, Erick Morillo, Laurent Wolf, Cosmic Gate, Blank & Jones, Roger Sanchez, Deep Dish, Laidback Luke, Ricky Stone, Matt Darey, Aly & Fila, Judge Jules, DJ Umek, Dubfire, Fedde le Grand, ATB, Eric Prydz, Gareth Emery, andy Moor. These are just 50 articles I found within minutes, I could find 100s of articles on similar DJs, producers, artists associated with electronic dance music with articles that are not well documented or referenced, yet not up for deletion. This doesn't mean I'm suggesting they're not notable figures or that the articles should be deleted, to the contrary, many of these names were taken from the DJmag top 100 list. I'm merely trying to make a point that if you looked at these articles with the same scrutiny as Johnston's you'd probably have to put most if not all of these up for deletion as well. Mperiera (talk)M Periera — Mperiera (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Seriously, where all you people coming from? Is Mikael posting on some forum asking for help? Also, you should see WP:WAX. But if you'd like, I can go through the articles you mentioned and run them through the deletion process.--Sandor Clegane (talk) 03:57, 17 August 2009 (UTC)


 * What is your problem Sandor?! I mean really, do you have some kind of vendetta against Johnston or something? His page is clearly in compliance on many levels, and while I admit I may not be as up on all the wiki rules as you are I have certainly made some arguments that are within the guidelines. If you're just determined to delete this guys page regardless of anyone's arguments, input or references then what's the point? You clearly know nothing about who is notable in electronic dance music, and frankly I do. So maybe you should try and say something constructive? Maybe work with me a little? Perhaps you might learn something. Mperiera (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 04:23, 17 August 2009 (UTC). — Mperiera (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Keep So, I am a relatively new wiki user and absolutely love this site. I am also a total die hard dance music fan and have been looking up all my favorite artists recently.  Some of my favorites include Moby, David Guetta, Paul Oakenfold, Morgan Page, The Crystal Method, Dave Dresden and Mikael Johnston. Kind of blown away though that when I went to pull up Mikael Johnston, his page is up for deletion??? It makes absolutely no sense to delete something without giving the author or biographer or interested 3rd party the opportunity to rectify the situation.  And, with reference to Sandor Clegane's comments, I believe he has been reading too much of his own work.  I am a fan of George R.R. Martin's series A Song of Ice and Fire - and frankly, it would seem that rather than face real issues worthy of debate, you are still living in the shadow of your brother.  Seriously, go take on a truly noteworthy cause like global warming or world peace or healthcare reform, not whether or not to delete someone's wiki profile.  There are too many fans out there that want to be able to read and learn and enjoy music by looking up their favorite artists - and not have to deal with these trivial matters. Lishlet (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 04:58, 17 August 2009 (UTC). — Lishlet (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Thanks for your concern, but I'm quite skilled at double-tasking--I can take on global warming as well as vanity pages on Wikipedia at the same time. Amazing, huh?--Sandor Clegane (talk) 00:24, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Not to be mean, but this debate isn't about who your favorite artists are or who you are a fan of (Nobody cares). I suggest reading What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia is not a blog, nobody should have a "wiki profile", there is more appropriate places for that. And btw before beating up on Sandor for debating this, keep in mind Mikael triggered this debate in the first place by (at least how apprears) creating an article about him self. (See Autobiography) I understand Mikael claims other people where using his account to create this page. But this however is a violation of Wikipedia's User Name Policy and is still nonetheless a Conflict of interest. --Abc518 (talk) 00:45, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. Granted, apparently massive COI, and article is probably too long, with too much unreferenceable and nonnotable material (if this was more neutral, COI wouldnt matter. for example, i think we can forgive someone like einstein creating a stub article about himself). many of the references are not really that good. speaking as an outsider to the music scene (though a music fan in general, with some knowledge of it), he appears to be notable. ill probably like his music, so im not biased against him. I would strongly recommend the article be trimmed back to basics, and not include discographies of all the projects hes been connected with. and to all the fans here: chill out. its an encyclopedia article, nothing more, nothing less. if he isnt notable yet (and i think he is), hell be notable shortly, if he continues to work, and this site is not a commercial powerhouse. if any one, including the artist, wants to promote sales, there are MUCH more creative ways to do this than creating a wp article thats overly promotional. personally, i become MORE interested in subjects when the article is brief, clearly indicates their relative notability, and leaves it to me to explore further. but then i tend toward being overly logical, having existed for 3 years as a Phraint.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 21:48, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Jonthanfernandez (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 06:05, 18 August 2009 (UTC). — Jonthanfernandez (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep. I was searching for more information on the producer that Dave Dresden of Gabriel & Dresden fame was working with currently and came across Mr. Johnston's Wikepedia entry and see that it's up for deletion. I do not agree with the stance of Mr Clegane. Mr. Johnston has been a major contributor to the electronic dance music community for well over a decade. In fact, i didn't realize that he was the founder of Mephisto Odyssey until i looked at his wikipedia entry. I knew that if he was partnering with someone as prolific as Mr. Dresden, that he had to be someone of experience and notability. Now that i also know that he is the same person who fronted that very successful and acclaimed act i can certainly say with confidence that you should keep his page up.
 * Seriously, how many of these just-registered single-purpose accounts are going to come into this by the time it's over? "Oh, I just conveniently happened to stop by and I just happened to see this up for deletion so I just thought I'd register." I've seen the same exact thing happening in numerous AFDs in the past and it's getting ridicilous.--Sandor Clegane (talk) 15:42, 18 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. I agree with some of the points that Mercurywoodrose made. I think this article could be trimmed down a bit to read more neutral, but there's also a lot of historical information in the article as it pertains to electronic dance music that I believe is important from a research point of view. Also I think as a reference source cutting his discography is a bad idea. If anything that part of the article should be as complete and accurate as possible. His discography is actually missing releases that I am familiar with and that are of notoriety and I would think might be important in a historical perspective in regards to dance music history. Anyway Johnston clearly has notoriety in his field based on the references that have been provided, and there are probably a lot more online. The guy's name gets 1870 hits on google. I have friends that don't even get 1 hit on google. I think his article should have the deletion flag taken off, even if the other flags stay until the article is trimmed and rewritten to better conform to Wikipedia standards. I have a friend who has been a journalist for several dance music publications for over a decade that said he'd help rewrite Johnston's page. He was disturbed when I mentioned that his Wikipedia page was up for deletion.

Abc518 Lishnet has reason to be critical of Sandor's posts. I've also found them to be a bit... off putting, certainly not constructive. Also I don't think Lishnet was suggesting that "everyone should have a wikipedia page" nor do I think Lishnet was suggesting that Wikipedia is like a blog. I think they were just trying to point out that there are a lot of dance music artists of notoriety, Johnston being one of them and that deleting his page seemed like a bad choice. I have to be honest, there are a lot of really lame pages on here by DJs and other members of the electronic dance music community that clearly have absolutely no notoriety whatsoever, yet their pages aren't flagged for deletion. ...so why pick on Johnston's article? I'm guessing because he was stupid enough to start it himself, but that doesn't mean he's not notable or that his page should be deleted. Everyone on here but Sandor has agreed that Johnston is notable in his field, albeit to varying degrees. And yes I already read WP:WAX but you know something, when does common sense come into play? I am fairly new to Wikipedia so I obviously don't know all the rules for arguing my points. However, I have managed to do some reading regarding arbitration and one of the pages I read clearly stated that Common sense should also be applied in matters such as this...and while I'm on the topic of common sense whoever posted at the top of this page that Vanispamcruftisement applied to Johnston's article is... way off. According to the page I read on this all the properties have to apply for it to be true. From what I can tell other than the fact that Johnston might have started his own article, none of these definitions apply. This is clearly not an article written to promote a small business, post a personal resume or promote a fringe area of interest with limited appeal. Tact, constructiveness and common sense go a long way in a discussion or debate. These would seem to be good traits for an admin to have.

Mperiera (talk)


 * Keep Subject has coverage in multiple reliable sources (SF Weekly, Allmusic, East Bay Express, Keyboard Magazine), so meets WP:N.  dissolve  talk  06:28, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Johnston has coverage in multiple publications that from my interpretation seems to meet WP:N, and has been a well established electronic dance music artist, producer, remixer for over 14 years.

I am new to Wikipedia as a collaborator but have been using Wikipedia for years, and have specific interest in articles regarding electronic dance music artists.

Lishlet (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 16:26, 22 August 2009 (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.