Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve ODell


 * 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 return to draft space. There is an assertion of notability, but the promotional tones need to be dealt with before it can be in the mainspace. Since there is a consensus here to return it to the draft space, I've moved it back there. I would recommend against it being re-added to the mainspace until an experienced editor has checked it over and ensured that it is no longer promotional and is properly sourced for notability. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:13, 19 May 2014 (UTC)

Steve ODell

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Biography of a producer. Reads like a cross between a press release and resume. References consist of YouTube and citations to the subject's own website. Google doesn't return many relevant hits, and I don't think this producer passes WP:FILMMAKER. Even if he does, the article needs to be rewritten from scratch. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 22:10, 17 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Guatemala-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. By any standards Steve ODell has complished much more than ordinary men. His life represents a resounding independence and his entrepreneurial spirit sets him a part. - Roseanna Viafranco 08:27, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs)
 * Well, that's nice for him, but we need significant coverage in reliable sources. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 08:45, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * OK article is revised. What's next? - Roseanna Viafranco 09:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs)
 * Well, I'd suggest you remove the puffery and gratuitous boldface, add more reliable sources, and read our guideline on conflicts of interest. Other people will – hopefully – comment on the discussion, and they will help to find a consensus.  Deletion discussions usually last a week, but they can be extended.  The more reliable sources that you can find, the greater the chance that the article will be kept.  Sometimes people will vote to delete overly promotional articles despite the existence of reliable sources.  I'd also read WP:FILMMAKER and make an argument based on that. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Check and re-inform me about any other errors. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs) 11:04, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Comment. Notability is yet to be supported as the TV series mentioned in the lead would be a red link.  Also, there is still a lot of bold usage that shouldn't even be italicized, as well as lack of separation between career and personal life that results in double-mention of some items.  I don't want to discourage a new user, but the page at Steve ODell (disambiguation) may also need to be deleted, especially if this page is deleted, since there are only two entries.  This article is still not encyclopedic in tone; it still reads more like a self-serving ad. –  Paine Ellsworth  C LIMAX !  11:46, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I've striped it done a lot. Take a look. - Roseanna Viafranco 12:23, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs)
 * So far, so good – some very good changes, there. I still think it needs to be moved back to Draft namespace, so it can be tweaked some more and then reviewed by experienced Afc reviewers.  They are the ones that can help you the most. –  Paine Ellsworth  C LIMAX !  12:31, 18 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Move. This draft article was moved in error from .  I suggest it be returned to Draft namespace as it is not yet ready for publication in mainspace.  This will require the help of an administrator. –  Paine Ellsworth  C LIMAX !  12:31, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I left some observations on moving this page at Talk:Steve ODell. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * when "Steve ODells Greatest Places on Earth TV series" is searched in Google, the first page lists at least 2 websites not created by Steve Odell. One is travel.com & the second is Honduras.com. Doesn't that validate its existence?- Roseanna Viafranco 12:41, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs)
 * Those websites are tourist sites and not always well-received as reliable sources due to their ads and sometimes questionable practices in regard to how and who they promote. What do Steve's peers have to say about him?  I read that he was mentioned in at least one periodical.  That might be a good source.  Then, how and where is the TV series aired?  Is it syndicated to other nations including the US, UK, Brazil, and so forth.  How well-known and widely-accepted is Steve O'Dell and his TV series?  That is the question you need to answer to pass notability muster. –  Paine Ellsworth  C LIMAX !  13:08, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * If he's working mostly in central America, it may be difficult to find evidence of his notability. I'm not sure how well Google (or other search engines) index sources from there.  I've created a few articles on South American films, but it wasn't easy to locate sources even for films that Variety called major financial successes.  Draft would be helpful, because it would allow the article to grow and find sources without fear of deletion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 13:26, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Ma'am I don't mean to challenge you. I respect all that you are doing to guide the users, but: your statement that, "tourism websites are not always reliable sources" is beyond judgmental! Our validating website Honduras.com is the flagship website representing all tourism in Honduras. Honduras is a nation to be respected, with high profile destinations like Roatan, which is a much desired vacation destination as well as a permanent stop for Carnival Cruise Lines & Royal Caribbean. Point taken? Of all the film producers in the entire world, Honduras chose Steve ODells Greatest Places on Earth Discover Honduras tv episode to represent their nations tourism product! Please consider these and other factors when pronouncing judgment on this article. By proportion alone, the US is just a speck on the globe while Mr ODells 18 countries to date represent vast populations & riches untold. Please do not view his accomplishments through the wrong end of a Coke bottle. I mean this with the same respect that we give to all of the nations that we defend through video reeducation. - Roseanna Viafranco 15:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs)
 * There certainly was no disrespect meant for any one particular website. My statement about tourism sites, however "beyond judgmental" it may seem, was born of previous experience with tourism websites in general.  Please forgive me if I sounded too rash and hasty.  I would not want to bend your focus away from the task of building an encyclopedic, undeletable article. –  Paine Ellsworth  C LIMAX !  17:57, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for at least admitting the relevance of the entire tourism product of Honduras. After working over 100 hours, doing as you have instructed, and stripping my article to bare bones, I see now that the whole process was a song and dance, ending with a discriminating judgment call by my advising editor. I guess that a life spent promoting a world outside of your borders is not worthy of validation. I choose to leave my article where it is and let the final judgment be by the powers that be. If it is deleted it is no surprise considering that it is similar opinions that have originally coined the phrase, "third world." Roseanna Viafranco 18:55, 18 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Roseanna Viafranco (talk • contribs)
 * This is why we advise editors not to directly edit articles with which they have a conflict of interest. It's difficult to look at this objectively when you're so close to the topic.  Accomplishments do not really matter to Wikipedia; instead, we require significant coverage in reliable sources.  Unfortunately, this means that many accomplished and admirable people do not satisfy Wikipedia's inclusion criteria.  It is not a slight against them; it means that a) we currently do not have enough sources for an article yet or b) our inclusion criteria may need to be amended.  You may be interested in WikiProject Countering Systemic Bias.  They may be able to help you work within Wikipedia's confusing and bureaucratic rules to include topics that are subject to bias from Wikipedia editors. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:19, 19 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Move to Draft: space and mark as a formal AFC submission. Once in Draft: space, it can be worked on without fear of a further AFD; but bear in mind that it cannot be left there indefinitely. If it is left untouched for six months and not brought up to a quality which justifies its being moved to mainspace, it then becomes eligible for WP:CSD. It should also be worked on by, the subject of the page. -- Red rose64 (talk) 13:54, 18 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I have chosen to . Trying to neutralize the article. I have legitimate documents to prove these events,see them on subjects website. It was good then and is good now. Can you make suggestions? Or is this a lost cause? Pona (talk) 02:57, 19 May 2014 (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.