Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Troy Blackford


 * 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. J I P | Talk 15:24, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Troy Blackford
Seems fairly non-n. See Mad Jack 21:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nod Mad Jack 21:54, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I generally use Amazon as an "acid test" for the notability of an author, and none of his works are listed. This means he most likely publishes via a vanity press. --Thorne N. Melcher 22:21, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per above. Dionyseus 00:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Wikipedia:NOT not paper. The second work is the first truly published work, and is supposed to be available on amazon by the end of the month. Define 'non-n' Though listed under authors, there are several more things about this person that qualify them for listability. --Ira-welkin 02:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems an interesting enough guy, but I don't see notability based on what's here. He started a few nn websites. He recorded an album, which is a very different thing from released an album, and is recording another. No record company listed. A book that is supposed to be available in the future, but no way to verify that, or if it will sell when published. Sorry, not there yet. Fan-1967 02:30, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - even the article itself suggests that the subject is "...becoming emergently known..." - logically, one may conclude that the subject itself is not notable at this time. It would be a simple matter to resurrect this article when the artist is no longer in the process of "becoming emergently known" and is in fact, well established. --HappyCamper 05:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep!! Its a good article, I don't see why it should be deleted. - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.71.138.227 (talk • contribs) 17:04, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * KeepWhats the big deal? Is this page really hurting anybody? No it isnt so stop crying about getting it deleted and mind your own damn business. - Mikewjordan 17:19, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * Keep I'm an author myself, keep it here!!!!! SCB — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.14.150.194 (talk • contribs) 17:26, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * Keep This article has every right to be here along with the others. It is enlightening, educational, and a good read in general.  Seantelle 17:34, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * -Keep- I totally agree with saving this article. I found it rich with entertainment. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Seantelle (talk • contribs) 17:36, 2 August 2006 Note: Second edit, and second vote in a row, from this user
 * KeepI don't see what the big problem is with keeping the article up. It's informative,he's a great guy, and it's definitely not hurting anyone. We want new people in the world, we want to learn more.. the mysteries in this world is great, the ones that actually delve deep within society and the unknown are the only ones even attempting to help those that wish to know more.. are very few. Oh, wait, no.. there's quite a few, but they gain no attention from anything, due to things like this. People bust them down and make them disappear just like some notable artists and novelists in this world. How else is a person to get a contract or a publishing contact without being known? What kind of publisher would want to take on a person not known by -anyone- with something that some publishers have no idea about? Take that into concideration, you may very well be putting a wet blanket upon a firey new novelist or even a new, and actually, interesting, real life show.Becki Daniels, CEO Gamers Guild — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.134.23.25 (talk • contribs) 17:54, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * Keep So far I am in agreement with everything said by others who voted 'keep.' Troy is truly a great guy, lovable, entertaining, passionate, dedicated, talented, and still on his way up.  Not only does he have a huge following, but he is still on the rise, which is more than impressive, and he has done more than most of us could ever hope to accomplish.  As his book shall be out soon, I also see no harm in having his page here meanwhile.  I would rather this site be ahead of the times than months behind them.  -M. Bang. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.12.121.178 (talk • contribs) 17:58, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * Keep Who is it hurting?  We should be supportive of up and coming talent, not trying to crush it.  We're talking about a field that is already extremely hard to break into, without our comdemning or judging.  It's very simple really, do unto others as you would have done to you.  I learned that before I was five, and I'm a better person for following such a policy.--Kaboob22 18:11, 2 August 2006 (UTC) Note: First edit from this user
 * Keep I don't see why this article needs to be deleted.  Are those proposing deletion jealous that Troy gets a Wikipedia entry? What the heck?  The article is informative and well written, and if being "non-n" (whatever that means) is reason enough to delete an article, I say that this article is "un-non-n" and should be kept.  We need a venue to inform ourselves on new talents, and Troy certainly qualifies as such.  Isn't Wikipedia about getting away from the bulls**t that the general media provides, and providing information that is given and revised by the internet community.  Instead of knocking emerging artist down because they don't fit the popular culture definition of being reference-worthy, the Wikipedia community should embrace the opportunity to inform and educate on matters or artists that are otherwise ignored by other mediums.  And those who don't like this idea should go eonline.com to feast on the commericial media chuck wagon, I'm sure you're eager to find out when Ashley Simpson's book of poetry is out. -Anjie — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.120.233.158 (talk • contribs) 19:59, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * Keep- Freedom of the press~ Meggers 20:51, 2 August 2006 Note: First edit from this user
 * Delete Sorry Troy. I find you to be a very interesting person, and I even call you my friend on myspace. You're a lot more constructive than most of us, and I believe in your work. But I also believe in Wikipedia's work. This article about you may not hurt anyone, but there is a right place and time for everything. This is not the place or time....yet. When your name is out there, and people come to Wikipedia looking for your name, instead of seeing the article by typing your name into Google, or clicking on a link directly to it, then you will be ready for the Wikipedia ;) --Terrormachine 23:08, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The article is thorough, and the subject seems to be very popular in certain circles, but in the end there is no assertion of notability for inclusion here. -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 15:59, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - subject seems to have made little impact on the world - fails WP:BIO - Peripitus (Talk) 06:17, 6 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Isn't there a wikipedia policy against vanity pages? This seems to be nothing more than one, perhaps written by the author himself.  The multiple new users logging in to post messages of support (sometimes twice) are kind of a possible sign of such ...--ThatBajoranGuy 06:48, 7 August 2006 (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.