Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Xavier Ruffin


 * 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. Black Kite (talk) 14:55, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Xavier Ruffin

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

While this article has now changed somewhat since it was first deleted at Articles for deletion/Xavier ruffin, it still fails WP:GNG and WP:BIO as the additional sources provided are neither reliable nor in-depth coverage, nor do they support many of the promotional assertions contained in the article. VernoWhitney (talk) 15:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:30, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:31, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - The Wall Street Journal is a very reliable source, along with JSonline, the web counterpart to Milwaukee's largest news publication, and OnMilwaukee.com. Mentions in these publication show that this person is note worthy at the very least in the region. This person his had works published and been recognized on a regional, national, and internation level. I would argue that renders him note worthy. And there are at least two sources that have in-depth coverage of the individual. — Preceding unsigned comment added by X2541 (talk • contribs)
 * Creative Fusion Remarks
 * You are correct that both the Wall Street Journal and JSOnline (being the outlet for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) are reliable sources. My apologies for being overly broad in my nomination statement. That said, the mentions of Ruffin in the two JSOnline blog entries I see appear to be only passing mentions of a sentence each. I didn't catch any mention of him in the WSJ video provided as a source. The fact that someone's work has been published on a wide scale does not inherently make them notable; there must be "significant coverage [about the subject] in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" per WP:BIO. As to the citations you provided immediately above; he is an alumni of the Milwaukee Institute of Art & Design so I'm not sure just how independent of the subject that article actually is, but it is the most promising source I've seen. The second link to "Creative Fusion Remarks" appears to be a speech or statement given by Ruffin himself and if so is definitively not independent of the subject. VernoWhitney (talk) 18:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)
 * You are correct that both the Wall Street Journal and JSOnline (being the outlet for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel) are reliable sources. My apologies for being overly broad in my nomination statement. That said, the mentions of Ruffin in the two JSOnline blog entries I see appear to be only passing mentions of a sentence each. I didn't catch any mention of him in the WSJ video provided as a source. The fact that someone's work has been published on a wide scale does not inherently make them notable; there must be "significant coverage [about the subject] in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject" per WP:BIO. As to the citations you provided immediately above; he is an alumni of the Milwaukee Institute of Art & Design so I'm not sure just how independent of the subject that article actually is, but it is the most promising source I've seen. The second link to "Creative Fusion Remarks" appears to be a speech or statement given by Ruffin himself and if so is definitively not independent of the subject. VernoWhitney (talk) 18:40, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete VW is absolutely correct that mentions do not establish notability -- and also that most of the sources are clearly not independent. . Though I disagree with him about whether publication on a a large scale might indicate notability--I think in some cases it might, still  I do not see any indication here besides high school awards that the work is significant.  Additionally, the style of the prose indicates an advertisement, with unsourced material about the artist's style motivations. On balance, I suggest waiting until there is some unambiguously reliable substantial independent source -- even one such might be enough to supplement the other material here.  DGG ( talk ) 21:44, 24 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep - One more independent source with an in-depth coverage of the individual - an interview for a Polish radio station from 2011

Another source of critical acclaim from an independent source to show some of his works significance.

And the High School awards mentioned,The Scholastic Art & Writing Awards, are from the Alliance for Young Artists & Writers "The Scholastic Art & Writing Awards have an impressive legacy dating back to 1923 and a noteworthy roster of past winners including Andy Warhol, Sylvia Plath, Truman Capote, Richard Avedon, Robert Redford and Joyce Carol Oates." Those awards have a high level of prestige associated with them and could arguably be considered the artistic equivalent of being named an All-American Athlete. There are many individuals on wikipedia such as Andrus_Peat who's greatest accolades to date are their high school accomplishments — Preceding unsigned comment added by X2541 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 26 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete as per the nomination.--Juristicweb (talk) 00:29, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

"If the depth of coverage in any given source is not substantial, then multiple independent sources may be combined to demonstrate notability;" This article includes several references from Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, OnMilwaukee.com, Milwaukee Magazine,The Wall Street Journal, Iridescent, Volume 1 Pg 36 by Icograda and XXL (magazine). All notable, reliable, and intellectually independent sources. 
 * Keep This article meets the basic basic criteria for Notability:People which states "A person is presumed to be notable if he or she has been the subject of multiple published[3] secondary sources which are reliable, intellectually independent of each other,[4] and independent of the subject.[5]"
 * it also meets the Additional Criteria which states "The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times." Ruffin's multiple awards from the Alliance for Young Artists & Writers would qualify for this. —  added by X2541 (talk • contribs) 17:33, 27 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - "Xavier Ruffin of Marshall was elected chief justice of the state Supreme Court." Oh, not THAT Xavier Ruffin. "Jarvis Xavier Ruffin, 17, of the 2000 block of Highland Avenue." Not that one either. What about " Senior quarterback Shawn Crump is a three-year starter and Xavier Ruffin (5-10, 190) brings nice size to the RB position." or "including director Stan Perry and producer Xavier Ruffin of Milwaukee," Can't be Xavier Darnell Ruffin.. That's all I found on Xavier Ruffin. The Wikipedia article is written much better than most biographies that make their way to AfD. That, along with the smattering of references mentioned above by others, might make it worth keeing around a little longer. -Uzma Gamal (talk) 05:18, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Just a note: "the smattering of references mentioned above by others" (and accompanying keep !votes) were all provided by at multiple times, not multiple editors. VernoWhitney (talk) 16:46, 31 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:14, 1 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Striking through the multiple "keep" votes by X2541.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:51, 1 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. The article reads like a puff piece at the moment, and some of the sources fail WP:RS - but if X341 is correct, it seems the individual may meet the criteria of notability, notwithstanding that the article needs a lot of work. WaltonOne
 * Just to clarify, have you actually looked at the sources X2541 provided and agree that Ruffin is notable, or are you merely commenting that if they're correct then he's notable? VernoWhitney (talk) 18:20, 5 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Mr. Stradivarius  (have a chat) 17:03, 8 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete as having insufficient in-dpeth coverage in independent third party sources to meet WP:GNG. If such sources are added to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. (..and yes, I looked at every reference) Stuartyeates (talk) 10:44, 13 September 2012 (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.