Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Art Supawatt Purdy

I figured I'd run through the sources here so it'd take up less space, as the other page is already pretty lengthy. This run through includes the sources I'm removing from the article as unusable.


 * 1) "Big Chilli Insight: Art Cuts Loose with a new CD", The Big Chilli. This looks like it'd probably be usable, although I would like to see the article in question to make sure that it isn't just a WP:TRIVIAL article or a reprint of a press release. Probably usable
 * 2) ShareRice/AsianFuse Art. This is a wiki that anyone can edit, meaning that anyone can add something and anyone can edit an article. This doesn't make it a discerning or reliable source per Wikipedia's guidelines. To be fair, you can't even use Wikipedia as a RS for itself. Unusable, removed
 * 3) Classmates.com. Anyone can sign up with an account and claim they're from a certain school, either deliberately or by accident. This means that it cannot be used as a reliable source in any context. Unusable, removed
 * 4) "Man in The Dock". Living in Thailand. This might be usable, but without information about the magazine and the article, we have to assume that it's possibly unusable. While sources do not have to be on the Internet they do have to be verifiable and the fact that I can't seem to find the media outlet itself isn't really a great sign. Unusable until further information provided.
 * 5) "Cover Man: Blue Guy". Gent: Gentlemen's Magazine. This looks like it's being used to show that he was on a magazine. Issues about verification aside (which is still an issue), just being on a magazine is not enough to show notability on here. You need to have articles about Purdy to show that his modeling career is noteworthy. It's generally accepted that a model will work within the industry and even land visible gigs - you need coverage to establish notability. Good as a trivial source, but not as an in-depth source to show notability.
 * 6) Wikipedia article. This goes to a Wikipedia article. You cannot and I repeat cannot use Wikipedia to back up a claim, especially when you're using it to back up a quote. Now I did find the source in question, but it looks like the article isn't actually about him but about someone going around Bangkok. This makes it a trivial source at best. Given that this is being used to justify that the actor is generally referred to as a heart throb, I'm going to remove it. One offhand statement does not mean that everyone is referring to Purdy in this manner. Trivial source, removed b/c it was being misused
 * 7) Siam Zone. I used Google Translate for this and offhand this looks to be unusable since there isn't really anything about their editorial process. Their contact page only lists a general email rather than a list of staff, so barring further evidence that the site is seen as a RS by other RS, I have to assume that this is unusable. I'm going to leave it on for the time being, though.
 * 8) Linkedin. This is not a reliable source, nor should it be on Wikipedia. Anyone can create an account and claim whatever they want on there. Even if the claims are true, the site still cannot establish notability. Unusable, removed.
 * 9) Cannes page. This can be used as a primary source, but it cannot show notability for the film or for Purdy's role in the movie. What you need here is coverage of Purdy in relation to the movie, like if he won an award for the song. So far this seems to be his biggest claim to fame and the basic gist of notability for performers is that notability is not automatically granted by performing music for a film or TV show and if this is the biggest claim to fame, then the article woudl redirect to the music section of that article. Usable as a primary source, but not for notability purposes.
 * 10) Blogspot. This is a WP:SPS, as it's a Blogspot blog. Blogs are almost never usable as a source since anyone can open a blog and write on various topics without any sort of editorial oversight. In order to use this as a RS you'd have to show where this blog has been routinely cited as an authoritative source by reliable sources. This is extremely difficult for blogs to accomplish and you'd need more than an offhand mention here and there. To put this in perspective, I've had people turn down blogs that have been mentioned 3-4 times in academic sources because it wasn't enough to show that they're authoritative. It's just that tough. You try to use this again later on down the page, so the same issues apply there. Unusable.
 * 11) Cannes sheet. This is actually good, as it can help argue for notability for Purdy. However the issue here is that so far the strongest sources for notability have centered around the film, so at this point we don't really have a lot to show that he's notable for more than the film, so at this point it could be argued that this would just redirect to that film.
 * 12) Khaosod. This wouldn't come up for me, so I can't verify it.
 * 13) Radio Sanook. This is just a music player, so it can't really do anything beyond proving that the song exists and that the musician added it to the site. I'm removing it because Wikipedia doesn't link to music players of this nature. Unusable, removed
 * 14) Ethai CD. This is an e-commerce site. These should not be on a Wikipedia article at all, since their goal is to sell you something. As such, linking to this can be seen as promotional, even if this wasn't the intent. Unusable, removed.
 * 15) Thai Wikipedia page. This cannot be used to establish notability nor can it be used to establish basic facts, as anyone can edit that page. As far as notability on that language WikiProject goes, each project's standards are different. Unusable, removed.
 * 16) Come Singapore. This is a routine notification of an event, so it cannot be used to establish notability and at best it'd be a trivial source, except that the source doesn't mention Purdy at all. Unusable for notability, removed.
 * 17) Linkedin. You use another person's Linkedin page and this is still unusable for the same reasons. Unusable, removed.
 * 18) Lush Addiction. This was ultimately just something that linked to an advertisement that didn't mention Purdy. I think he's the guy on the page, but this itself cannot be used to establish notability or even as a basic fact, since he's not explicitly mentioned on the advert. Unusable.

Offhand the only sources that can be verified are the ones about the song, so unless copies of the other articles can be provided, notability is only established for Purdy's role in the film's soundtrack. This means that so far I'd say that his name should redirect to the movie's article. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:54, 25 June 2016 (UTC)