Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Emerson


 * 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 keep. Nakon 01:09, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Rick Emerson

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

contested prod. This article fails to establish why this radio personality, out of thousands, is notable. No 3rd party references. Currently fails WP:BIO. EBSCO, Regional Business News, and ERIC database searches across Billboard, Mediaweek, local business journals, brought up only 1 hit and Emerson wasn't the subject of the article. Google news brought up a couple of hits from a paper in Portland, Oregon and a paper in Spokane. Can this article meet WP:BIO? Subject is a bit difficult to search on because of the common name. Rtphokie (talk) 23:35, 12 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment: I'm not taking a position on this. The guy and his show are clearly sufficiently notable for a WP article, but there's been more non-encyclopedic editing on both articles than I'm interested in dealing with; and a bad article might be worse than no article. However, if anyone does want to work on a better article, here are just a few of the many sources available about Emerson: -Pete (talk) 18:31, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Taylor, Dawn. "Geeks tune in to their time: Disenfranchised find home on the airwaves and in pop culture", Portland Tribune, April 1, 2008.
 * Werkhoven, Todd. "Static follows Entercom’s move", Portland Tribune, May 27, 2005.
 * Beck, Byron. "Rick Emerson "Weenie" Roast: It Was Kind of Like Oz (HBO's Prison show, not the Land of Munchkins)", Willamette Week, May 16, 2008.
 * Baumgarten, Mark. "Return of the pleasantness", Willamette Week, March 22, 2006.


 * delete local coverage of this sort does not establish notabilty. DGG (talk) 20:42, 15 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  16:04, 19 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete Fails WP:BIO. Masterpiece2000   ( talk ) 03:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - this article is not local content. The subject is known world-wide.  Albeit is a smaller capacity than some others, but with a large following of loyal listeners, listening through online streams and podcasts, this article is of definite quality and should be kept. TEG (talk) 00:07, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - references in the article do not support this person being known "world-wide". The only references are original sources or are from the local newspaper.--Rtphokie (talk) 01:44, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply - I just happen to operate one of the many outlets for his show, and I have logs that indicate people from around the world download and listen to his show. He has also mentioned on air the different places his show is downloaded, including by troops serving in Iraq.  I will try to find the direct reference to it in the minutes of the show and reference it accordingly. TEG (talk) 15:56, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Podcasts run by people out of their basements are downloaded by people around the world, that doesn't make them notable. References need to come from reliable 3rd party sources.--Rtphokie (talk) 11:22, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply While I don't agree with you, it doesn't matter - you're setting up a straw man. The podcasts are not made in somebody's basement, they're recordings of the on-air feed made available on the radio station's website, which is owned by CBS.  As for references, the archive TEG operates has been up for over two years, and he is not related to the show, to Rick Emerson, or to CBS Radio - I'd say that makes him a reliable third party. Owenja (talk) 09:22, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment You miss my point, the availability of a podcast doesn't guarantee notability.  A podcast which was originally broadcast over the air isn't any more notable either.   Also, can you expand on how TEG's archives establishes notability?  It's an self-published audio archive. WP:V tells us "Self-published sources should never be used as third-party sources about living persons" --Rtphokie (talk) 09:44, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply I disagree, a talk show broadcast over the radio is more notable than a self-produced podcast. The podcast was made by audience request so that people outside the station's coverage area could listen to it, and its availability wasn't used to demonstrate notability, its download statistics were -- specifically, that people around the world download it.  I'm saying that as a third-party redistributer TEG is able to provide those statistics. Owenja (talk) 18:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I landed on this page looking for information about Emerson, though the article doesn't provide any real idea what kind of show he puts on but the sources were helpful. &#8756; Therefore | talk 04:27, 22 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep With a global listening audience via podcast, including many troops in Iraq, a member of CBS Radio, the fact that he been made and directed movies, and lead singer in a band, that does qualify enough content for maintaining his wiki entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by F3u3rfr3i (talk • contribs) 16:11, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep My reading of WP:BIO would seem to indicate that he clearly meets the basic criteria, as Pete lists several independent articles above. He also meets at least the additional criteria for WP:ENTERTAINER for his roles in the movies Remote Control and Bigger Than Jesus, the song Geek Like Me, and of course his ongoing talk show; I would also assert that he has a large cult following, although this is hard to verify or cite.  As to the suggestion that it's difficult to search for Rick Emerson, as of this writing 23 of the top 29 hits on google directly relate to him or his show. Owenja (talk) 03:14, 24 June 2008 (UTC)
 * keep article seems to meet WP:BLP now.  Gtstricky Talk or C 19:53, 29 June 2008 (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.