Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myles Cochrane


 * 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. Blueboy96 15:09, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Myles Cochrane

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable radio host on minor radio station. The one award mentioned does not establish notability, most refs are primary sources. Hairhorn (talk) 00:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Hairhorn: Please refrain from judging how notable a radio host is being as I doubt you've listened to the thousands of radio hosts that have pages on here. Humboldt County has over 100 thousand people and KSLG has rated at number 1 for multiple years running. The one award mentioned is a national award that caters to excelling student radio personalities. Also please refer to the list of interviews that the host has if that's not notable I don't know what is. All the personal information that I got from Myles has been removed to cater to objectivity. This is merely a simple informative article that people in Humboldt County can refer to when searching for radio hosts. The minor radio station you refer to is listed along with the other three stations that Lost Coast Communications is a part of on wikipedia. 3 refs are sources from the official KSLG website, 1 is sourced to birth records, and other mentions the nation radio award. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.41.63.202 (talk) 00:11, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * First of all, please leave the maintenance tags on the entry, they are meant to help improve it. You might also want to read up on Wikipedia policy, such as the notability guidelines; for example, interviewing notable people does not make you notable. The entry also needs reliable sources. Lastly, entries are normally judged on their own merits, not on whether their subjects are more or less notable than the subjects of existing pages: since anyone can make a page, the fact that a page exists demonstrates very little. Cheers. Hairhorn (talk) 00:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

"There are four kinds of usernames that are specifically disallowed: [Item one being] Misleading usernames imply relevant, misleading things about the contributor. Misleading names include those that imply you are in a position of authority over Wikipedia, or those that impersonate other people." (from Username). Peridon (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:37, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete A distinct lack of independent references indicating notability. A student award (shared) is hardly enough. "This is merely a simple informative article that people in Humboldt County can refer to when searching for radio hosts." Why don't they use the radio station site? This looks somewhat like a self-promotional exercise by someone who wants to go places further than Humboldt County. Fair enough. I wish you luck. But this is not the place. Not yet. When you get the prime slot on the No 3 station in NY, yes. Someone will have made the article for you by then... Peridon (talk) 14:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the statement by the nominator and by Peridon. Non-notable radio host on a minor radio station. Xtzou ( Talk ) 14:09, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment If the article's creator is in fact Myles Cochrane, I would advise him to read WP:COI. If he is in fact not Myles Cochrane, may I extract and quote
 * Comment There are 3 different news sites that link to the award- one of them stating that my portion was the centerpiece. Simply stating that it is a student award is, yes, not notable. However I agree that the award is national and therefore notable (I would right?). I also understand the view of Peridon and thank him for being the only contributor so far to handle this situation with respect. The most I contributed to this article was, and I regret to admit this, asking a friend to make it for me. I would encourage those that have control over deletion to listen to a half hour of my show first. 6-midnight PT streaming at kslg.com. Peace. User:Myles cochrane —Preceding undated comment added 16:12, 18 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Ta for that - don't often get compliments... Afraid that listening to the station would probably count as Original Research or something similar. No matter how good you are, it's the reliable sources that are what's looked for. Something non-editable and not press release. When you've got those - come back. (These discussions usually take seven days or so, anyway.) In the meantime, there's aboutus and LinkedIn which are for publicity info and such. Peridon (talk) 16:25, 18 April 2010 (UTC)


 * CommentRight, there are some sources that are press-release. But I do count 4-5 articles in this article that were written from outside sources. This is truly just an article for information, as people in Hubmoldt County are quite familiar with the use of wikipedia. I was hoping to make pages for more DJs in the area after this. User:Myles cochrane —Preceding undated comment added 19:59, 18 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Trouble is, the most of the references either don't mention you (so far as I can see), or are not reliable (by Wikipedia's standard which even cute Wikipedia out as a reference!), or are merely establishing existence (birth...). We don't doubt you exist - we need more evidence that you are noted rather than evidence of what goes on (roller derby...). Peridon (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Unfortunately google isn't any grounds for deletion. There are enough news hits referenced in the article for me to keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.64.214 (talk) 20:02, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * CommentI suppose that's true. I'm going to link a Humboldt State University Alumni article for reference on the award also. I have a question...would getting an article published and linked affect notability? There will be more articles on Roller Derby soon as well. User:Myles cochrane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.64.214 (talk) 21:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Almost none of the material in the article can be sourced to reliable secondary sources. None of the sources listed in the article establish the notability of the subject. Brad 23:05, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. I had a spectacular vision of a beautiful future where cognitive thinking allowed us to evolve to the point where a national award winning however assumed "non-notable" radio host could get a page on gods gift to man, wikipedia. The only secondary sources listed are kslg.com/myles and the KSLG facebook page. Those links can be removed. The rest though, the rest are primary. That is no grounds for deletion. Also, see Criteria 2 on Notability (academics): The person has received a highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level. The College Broadcasters, Inc. award is national. Also please see Notability (people) Creative Professionals 3: The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews. Please see kslg.com/myles (no matter if its primary- it's there) and one will find multiple well thought out interviews with many prominent people and musicians. That is a significant collective body of work. In fact, I'm looking forward to my interview with "Fight Club" author Chuck Palahniuk soon. User:Myles cochrane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.62.160 (talk) 15:26, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. He gets 666 Ghits on Google - score O Fortuna from Carmina Burana.  No, seriously, with the cruft removed, he only garners 177 Ghits and Zero news ghits.  Even a crappy BLP could not be created. Bearian (talk) 19:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You've already voted once. Hairhorn (talk) 20:48, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Correct, the number of Ghits doesn't matter, and neither does my stale sense of humor. What does matter is that there are no decent sources to cite for this BLP. Bearian (talk) 21:52, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. The user in question who had a "friend" write this page is actually somewhat fair and balanced. Not fair and balanced like Fox News per se, but it has no information that would lead me to believe that the subject could obtain monetary or social gain through this article. If he were to remove the facebook source (who does that?) I would like to see this thing kept. User:Myles cochrane brought up a great point in Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals 3. His award linked to 3 sources and interviews give him notability. Amend the facebook sources, Myles, and I say keep it. There are bigger battles to be won than this as the original grounds for deletion include notability and sources. As noted above in the distinct rules for notability, he has a place on wikipedia. Copernicus1952 (talk)
 * Copernicus1952, you are a new account that just registered today and have made 2 edits. Xtzou ( Talk ) 21:17, 19 April 2010 (UTC)

Xtzou: Thanks for the update. You've only been a user for 19 days. Are you going to rebuttal my argument, or are you just going to bring up petty nonsense? Copernicus1952 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:31, 19 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Fair or not, new users whose only contributions are to an AFD are viewed with suspicion. Worse, your first edit modified an earlier posting by the IP 75.111.64.214, who already identified themselves as User:Myles cochrane in an earlier edit. So any suspicions are justified, whether or not they're "petty". Hairhorn (talk) 05:40, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete, local DJ, not notable per WP:BIO. NawlinWiki (talk) 21:55, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Just being local is not a grounds for deletion. Please see national award. Please see Notability from Academics and Creative Professions. See Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals (Criteria 3). Copernicus1952 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 22:06, 19 April 2010 (UTC).
 * Comment User:Copernicus1952: Thanks for that. Didn't feel like anyone on here would defend me. Do you live in Humboldt County? My friend just removed the facebook stuff.  Myles cochrane  ( Talk ) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.111.165 (talk) 23:28, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as the subject lacks in-depth coverage in reliable third-party sources and thus fails to cross the notability threshold. Several cited sources do not mention Cochrane at all.  The CBI award, even split three ways, is slightly persuasive but would be far better handled as a paragraph in that college station's "Awards and honors" section giving mention of all of the winners. - Dravecky (talk) 14:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete I am a resident of Humboldt County and Miles is the very least notable of all Humboldt Radio DJs. While I don't know if you can discount all Humboldt DJs, Miles exists in a position that exists for college students trying to just get experience. 96.41.10.97 (talk) 16:42, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Unfortunately I think you're confusing KSLG for KRFH. KRFH is a student-run radio station. However KSLG caters to a county-wide audience. He is my favorite Humboldt County DJ and is on 94.1 FM from 6-Midnight 7 days a week. Copernicus1952 (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.64.214 (talk) 17:44, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * No, I really meant his position on KSLG is the time slot they schedule college (even high school) students over the years, to give them radio experience and these DJs don't last long.96.41.10.97 (talk) 06:58, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * To be clearYou need to get your facts straight. I am a Humboldt County resident as well, and have lived in the area for a decade now. There has NEVER been a high school student in the 6-midnight slight on KSLG. The last person to hold that slot was there for 4-5 years. We blast Myles to Midnight at our local business. He and that daytime guy seem to be the only one that are on while KSLG's target market is awake. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.100.22 (talk) 23:59, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * 'Comment Good thing this is not a democracy, and that it rules in favor of Wikipedia guidelines.. Just look at Wikipedia notability standards: Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals (Criteria 3). The award and interview work give him a spot on here. Wikipedia notability standards: Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals (Criteria 3).Copernicus1952 (talk) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.64.214 (talk) 20:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Interesting that 'Copernicus1952' and 'User:MylesColeman' have both left it up to SineBot to add the origin of their posts. I'm slightly puzzled by Copernicus1952's last post: calling for 'delete' but saying "The award and interview work give him a spot on here.". Peridon (talk) 20:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment My previous post where I mention "Delete" was meant to say "Comment." Interesting that nobody has come up with a rebuttal to the fact that this article belongs here in regards to Wikipedia notability standards: Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals (Criteria 3). And as to your redundant comments on external factors, I am new to Wikipedia and don't know any other way to sign. Sinebot here we go. Copernicus1952 (talk)
 * Keep. Im from humboldt county, i've heard myles, and i vote to keep. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.100.18 (talk) 22:36, 20 April 2010 (UTC) — 137.150.100.18 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete. There should be a strong presumption against autobiographies. If someone is notable, an independent person will eventually start an article. In addition, the article creator is misreading the notability guidelines. He claims that there is a significant collective body of work that he has created. First, I don't think the significant has been established. Second, the article creator neglects the remainder of that criterion, that the work "has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." There isn't a book, feature film, or set of independent periodical articles discussing Cochrane's interviews. That's not severable; it can't simply be ignored. I don't think the academia is the proper notability test. Although the subject is a student, his supposed notability doesn't seem to come from teaching/research. But again, he's reading out of existence important parts of the tests. It's not enough to win a national award. It has to be a "highly prestigious academic award or honor at a national or international level." The level of prestige hasn't been estalished. The organization (let alone the particular award) don't even appear to have its own wikipedia article. And even though the award is given to student broadcasters, I don't think it should fall under the academic test anyway. After all, an award given for the sports exploits of student-athlete would lead to the athlete being judge under the academic standard. --JamesAM (talk) 00:42, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * To expand upon why this individual doesn't qualify as notable under WP:PROF, note the examples from that guideline: "For the purposes of Criterion 2, major academic awards, such as the Nobel Prize, MacArthur Fellowship, the Fields Medal, the Bancroft Prize, the Pulitzer Prize for History, etc, always qualify under Criterion 2. Some lesser significant academic honors and awards that confer a high level of academic prestige also can be used to satisfy Criterion 2. Examples may include certain awards, honors and prizes of notable academic societies, of notable foundations and trusts (e.g. the Guggenheim Fellowship, Linguapax Prize), etc. Significant academic awards and honors can also be used to partially satisfy Criterion 1 (see item 4 above in this section). Victories in academic student competitions at the high school and university level as well as other awards and honors for academic student achievements (at either high school, undergraduate or graduate level) do not qualify under Criterion 2 and do not count towards partially satisfying Criterion 1." --JamesAM (talk) 00:48, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Interesting manipulation of words. Even so, I think Myles is awesome and has some good stuff to contribute to this world. Keep. I think he got a national award. I think he has a significant body of work- I've heard it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.41.63.202 (talk) 01:38, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Same IP that made the opening comment, I expect you've voted already. Hairhorn (talk) 01:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Haven't looked at this since the opening comment, and as you'll notice, I didn't vote until now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.41.63.202 (talk) 02:34, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * In your first IP comment you make it pretty clear that you're the article creator, who has already voted at least once. Hairhorn (talk) 03:22, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Please read the first comment again, Hairhorn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.41.63.202 (talk) 15:27, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. I just amended the Copernicus vote to "Comment." He stated that's what he meant at the same IP following the post.
 * Delete  Claiming this qualifies under WP:PROF does not seem sensible. I dont think it means anything nearly as restricted as JamesAM does, but it does not refer to an award for a student newscast.  DGG ( talk ) 03:03, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I agree, JamesAM is stretching it for WP:PROF. However I believe that the award is credible, academic, and national. Journalism is a program in academia just the same as Science and Mathematics. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.62.160 (talk) 04:10, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * — 75.111.62.160 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment to the residents of Humboldt County You being residents of the county and listeners to the radio station and fans of Myles will have no effect on the results of this discussion. It is not a popularity contest. It is a discussion to see if certain criteria are met - and if there are reliable references to support this. Personal opinions about Myles and his show are NOT reliable sources. I would probably like the music there more than I like rap (couldn't really be less...), but I did save an article about a rapper because I could find notability. I can't here. As I said above, yet..... If you can find the refs - no blogs, forums, self-published, editable or personal opinions - tell us. Otherwise, you're wasting your time posting. Peridon (talk) 17:40, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Another comment to Humboldt County residents: This is not a popularity contest. This is a credibility contest. Myles Cochrane is credible for a wikipedia article in regards to Wikipedia notability standards: Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals (Criteria 3). If you think Myles is credible due to these guidelines please continue to comment and cite those as the reasons for your vote. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.111.217 (talk) 19:50, 21 April 2010 (UTC) — 137.150.111.217 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * That won't help. Despite what Myles Cochrane may have said on his radio show, this is not a vote. Brad 19:52, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. I agree with the previous statement to "keep." This is a vote. I am voting because I have read and understood Criteria 2 on Notability (academics) and Notability (people) Creative Professionals (Criteria 3). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.111.165 (talk) 19:57, 21 April 2010 (UTC)  — 137.150.111.165 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Comment. One can't understand Criterion 2 on Notability (academics) and use it as the basis for keeping this article. As I noted above, that guideline explicitly excludes student awards from Criterion 2. So there's no wiggle room to be found to apply that criterion to keep this article. --JamesAM (talk) 23:55, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Please note This is not a voting procedure. The count of deletes and keeps is not what decides things. A decision will be made by an admin person after he/she has reviewed all the posts. Parroting by anonymous or single purpose accounts usually harms the case in support of which they are brought here. Get the references if you really want to help. Peridon (talk) 21:53, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Though this is not a voting procedure we would like our votes to be counted in reference to the guidelines on notability mentioned. This guy has a significant body of journalistic work on notable people. This guy won a national academic award. Please see Criteria 2 on WP:ACADEMIC: Myles won a national award. Please see WP:CREATIVE Creative Professionals (Criteria 4):The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums. His journalistic work on http://www.kslg.com/myles is vast, monumental, and significant- which means it fits category "a." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.100.22 (talk) 00:11, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I heard about this debate on Myles show last night. I've read the this entire page and it looks like people have found some striking evidence that Myles should have a wikipage because of WP:ACADEMIC Criteria 2 and WP:CREATIVE Criteria 4a. Secondary sources can be linked to primary sources for cross-referencing, and the interviews he does are great! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 137.150.35.220 (talk) 19:09, 22 April 2010 (UTC)  — 137.150.35.220 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Academic and Creative Academic? "This guideline, sometimes referred to as the professor test, is meant to reflect consensus about the notability of academics as measured by their academic achievements. For the purposes of this guideline an academic is someone engaged in scholarly research or higher education and academic notability refers to being known for such engagement." This refers to people in the world of science, literature, fine arts (which doesn't include rock), university teaching and research, etc. It does not refer to a student award for journalism and interviewing people. Creative? "The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument" - if it has, where is the evidence? The radio station site is not independent evidence. Sorry, folks. Nice try but no (chocolate) cigar... Peridon (talk) 19:54, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * The person that recommended this article for deletion is evidently becoming wary of the fact that he or she may be wrong. It is only in the opinion of Peridon that "Music" is not a fine art, "Journalism" is not an area of academics, and that an expansive interview portfolio is not a significant creative monument. Please continue to vote if you agree that Cochrane should have a wikipage because of WP:ACADEMIC Criteria 2 and WP:CREATIVE Criteria 4a. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.48.112 (talk) 20:36, 22 April 2010 (UTC)  — 75.111.48.112 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete I wasn't going to comment until I saw this remark from 137.150.35.220 (one of the multitude of never-before-edited people who have suddenly showed up here in support of the subject): "I heard about this debate on Myles show last night." Mr. Cochrane, you should be ashamed of yourself, using your station to troll for votes for yourself. You are perverting the process here in an attempt to glorify yourself. This kind of thing, if allowed, would be the death of Wikipedia as a useful reference. I hope the article is deleted and salted (look it up). --MelanieN (talk) 01:27, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment You should be ashamed of yourself for jumping to conclusions too quickly. Have you ever heard the term to assume makes an a** out of u and me? I've heard Myles talk about this on his show. First of all he brings it up as an interesting debate with good points on both sides. He then goes on to say he would like to encourage those that have read the debate to weigh in on it. The people weighing in on this have all listed WP:ACADEMIC Criteria 2 and WP:CREATIVE Criteria 4a as a means for this article to be kept- not that Myles told them to do so. I've head him talk about this and he wouldn't do that. It actually makes for interesting radio, this whole thing. Would you expect him to just say nothing? If so you obviously don't know much about people in the media industry...they love to talk about EVERYTHING. Just because these people heard about the debate doesn't make this process any less of a debate. Its called canvassing. It's people like you that make assumptions too quickly that will be the death of wikipedia. Look it up: WP:CANVASS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.41.63.202 (talk) 01:48, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * "not that Myles told them to do so." Yeah, right. All these people who have never been to Wikipedia before, just all happen to all quote the same (totally irrelevant) arguments, citing chapter and verse. (Why irrelevant? Citing the "academic" standard here is absurd; it applies to academics, i.e., professors. The "creative" standard also doesn't apply; it's for artists, authors, architects, etc. Mr. Cochrane's notability must be judged according to WP:ENTERTAINER - the standard for actors, TV personalities, and similar performers.) If Mr. Cochrane understood Wikipedia at all, he would know that this barrage of posts is hurting him, not helping. The process here is about achieving consensus among Wikipedians, people who know how Wikipedia works and what it stands for. Not drumming up a lot of "votes" from people who don't know the first thing about this place. The first thing being: Wikipedia has to have standards. It is not a place where anybody can post any old thing they like. There are a lot of places like that on the Web; this is not one of them. --MelanieN (talk) 04:32, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * WP:Creative 4a? You mean "The person's work has become a significant monument"? Sorry, but no. And WP:prof doesn't apply at all. Did you miss the comment above about repaeating the same point over and over hurting your case? Hairhorn (talk) 02:24, 23 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete Wow, I haven't checked this in a while...this thing has really gotten out of hand hasn't it? I never should have agreed to contribute to this article with a peer. Even I thought it was long shot to have a wikipedia article.. I should have just gone with my first instinct. I would like to thank everybody that went out of their way to read and discuss this issue. Wikipedians: please note that I respect what you have done here. In a crazy roundabout way reading this discussion has lead me to become quite fond of Wikipedia as a reliable source. I don't belong on here. I would also like to clarify on how I brought this up on my show. I asked people to read the debate, to read the guidelines, to create an account, and to contribute if they found something. Though I respect and even find it a little amusing that they brought up those same few guidelines repeatedly, that was not my intention or call to action. Also please note: when I discuss wikipedia on the air I will have the utmost respect for what you e-scholars are doing- despite that most recent comment. MelanieN: I respectfully hope you don't utilize that Stanford education to attack people without merit on here any longer. Thank you all for your time and efforts. Myles cochrane (talk) 14:52, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Myles. I can find only one news article mentioning him, so I don't think he meets the bar (yet) for a BLP articles. Best of luck Myles! -- Nuujinn (talk) 22:36, 23 April 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.