Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bryan Pisano (2nd nomination)

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. While the number of apparent SPAs muddy the waters, there is little currently in the article to indicate that Mr Pisano is notable by Wikipedia standards. Supporting sources are exceptionally thin and don't meet WP:V standards. Pigman☿ 18:53, 11 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bryan Pisano

Deleted via AFD in 2006. At that time there was no IMDB entry for him; today he has one with one entry, a non-lead role in a straight-to-video feature. There are no Google News Archive results for his name. All we have are a handful of non-reliable "references" including his MySpace and Geocities as well as non-independent sources such as a production company. Someone attempted to PROD this, but it was removed (in any case, PROD may not be legal as it had a prior AFD). The IP user then attempted to add the 2006 discussion to AFD, but was probably stymied by being unable to create this discussion page. Dhartung | Talk 06:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Delete per submitter 65.11.23.219 (talk) 07:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pisano has a moderately notable acting resume in movies and commercials; however, I think the most important thing that makes him notable enough for Wikipedia is his role as Commander Ben Norstrom in a Star Trek episode. Furthermore, 65.11.23.219 just joined yesterday, so I believe the user may need more time to grasp what is necessary for a Wikipedia page. Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 09:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If you refer to his role on Star Trek:Hathaway, a fan production, being associated with such material is not generally an basis for notability. (I'm sure you just forgot to mention that it is not an official production of the Star Trek franchise.)--Dhartung | Talk 20:27, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your comment smacks of sarcasm, Dhartung. Please refrain from trying to start an argument. JoeC2004 (talk) 22:47, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Is someone trying to flame the argument? If so, these skewed comments should be removed. Sgt. bender (talk) 02:32, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Bryan Pisano is on the IMDB and is therefore notable enough to be on Wikipedia. Also, agree per Dr.orfannkyl. JoeC2004 (talk) 12:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ There are several people on IMDB who apparently don't warrant Wikipedia pages -- his acting resume is absolutely unnotable. 65.11.23.219 (talk) 07:17, 5 May 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.141.191.198 (talk) [reply]
- WP: Other Stuff Exists; read it. Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 13:26, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Huh? Do people, especially a non-member, usually get two votes? Sgt. bender (talk) 19:52, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment First of all, this is a discussion meant to achieve WP:CONSENSUS, not a vote per se. Second, nobody's opinion should be counted more than the strength of their argument from policies and guidelines. --Dhartung | Talk 20:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Pisano is more than notable and the article is thoroughly sourced. Pisano played an important character in a very notable science fiction empire. He also has played in commercials and other films. Has been significant vandalism on the page by IP addresses, not users. Sgt. bender (talk) 13:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete There are several people on IMDB who apparently don't warrant Wikipedia pages -- his acting resume is absolutely unnotable. There is no vandalism, just removal of lies - the short film Creepers can't be called a blockbuster - and errors - the man was born June 13, 1974. IMDB site is incorrect, and Wikipedia is duplicating the error. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Anymotion (talk • contribs)
- I believe the vandalism Sgt. Bender was talking about is the removal of Bryan Pisano's picture. Otherwise, changes to the article were considered vandalism because the sourcing wasn't clear. Also, WP: Other Stuff Exists; just because others on IMDB don't have Wikipedia articles doesn't mean that Bryan Pisano shouldn't. Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 20:02, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Okay, why should he? Enlighten us. --Dhartung | Talk 20:20, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Calm down there, Dhartung. Read the stuff I already wrote. Several movies, an internet Star Trek Episode, a Nickelodeon commercial, and a IMDB entry; that makes him notable to me. Dr.orfannkyl (talk) 22:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - I am calm. This person, however, is not a notable entertainer according to our guidelines, no matter what you personally think. We want significant roles in notable films. --Dhartung | Talk 00:34, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Instead of broad statements aimed against Bryan Pisano and instead of insulting a fellow user who doesn't agree with you, why don't you back up your claims with some facts, Dhartung? JoeC2004 (talk) 01:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Phasers Set On Delete: I am sympathetic to newcomers not knowing what is necessary for a Wikipedia article, but that doesn't mean that an article sourced only by Myspace pages and bulletin boards about a completely non-notable fellow deserves retention. Far from portraying an important character in a notable production, he appeared in one of the numerous Star Trek fan film efforts. His sole IMDB credit is in a $30,000 indie film. There are also WP:BLP issues. Just out of curiosity, what elements of WP:BIO do the Keep proponents claim this gent fulfills? Ravenswing 17:37, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I'm concerned about the availability of reliable sources, or lack thereof. I can't find a single news article that mentions him. MySpace is not enough, and IMDB is also not considered reliable. --Aude (talk) 22:41, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 02:15, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I've heard of him and I've seen some of the stuff he's been in. He's definately notable since he's been in several movies and is on IMDB. Also, what's with all the fighting higher in this page? Dhartung should really leave other users alone; he's obviously trying to start an argument. Beans are neither friut nor musical (talk) 02:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I find it very interesting that Dhartung accuses Beans are neither friut nor musical of having a SPA considering that Beans are neither friut nor musical has had an account since October 2006. If the reason for creating the account was to help Bryan Pisano it was long and belated (and probably not the case.) Also with JoeC2004 having an account for seven months before this seems to point away from a SPA. Observation. Sgt. bender (talk) 05:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: With those two having a combined 21 edits to date before the Pisano article on April 30th and this AfD, I'm comfortable with Dhartung's characterization. The definition of SPA doesn't include when the account in question was created. When the SPAs all push the same premise: that a person with a single IMDB credit in an unknown indie flick has not only appeared in "several" works (for which sources are not forthcoming) and that they've somehow seen him ... well, that's a tall heap of coincidence. May I ask why people are so intent on claiming "insult" from an accurate characterization? Now ... beyond that, we get from contribution history that you're a friend of Pisano's. In which case, you know what to do to save the article: provide reliable sources that demonstrate that he has appeared in notable productions, and evidence of what elements of WP:BIO this fellow fulfills. Ravenswing 12:56, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I created my account in 2006, how am I a SPA for Bryan Pisano? Clearly, you have no real argument and must stoop to insulting other members. I really have to ask, are you for real? Beans are neither friut nor musical (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Your account shows ten edits within a four day span in 2006. The account also had three edits within a four minute span on April 11 of this year. All your other Wikipedia activity has centered around this AfD. What about these facts do you find insulting? Would you prefer the terms "sockpuppet" or "meatpuppet" instead? (As to whether I am real, I have over nine thousand edits, having made more edits since 5 PM yesterday than you have in two years. Plainly if I'm an account existing only to bolster someone else's argument, that someone is working way, way, way too hard at it.) Ravenswing 13:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ravenswing, are you suggesting that accounts made months and years apart are somehow in a grand conspiracy to keep a small article on Bryan Pisano on Wikipedia? Please tell me you're kidding. JoeC2004 (talk) 13:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If you're trying to dispel the notion that there's sock/meatpuppetry going on, chiming in with protest edits on the different accounts seven minutes apart isn't helpful. Ravenswing 13:23, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I ask again, are you saying that accounts created months and years apart are somehow connected in a grand conspiracy to save Bryan Pisano? You do realize how ridiculous that sounds, right? And how can you call my account an SPA when you don't make the same claim for user:65.11.23.219, who edited for the first time two days ago, and has commented on this article several times? Furthermore, I am only commenting so much on this article because of the insults being levied. So tell me, Ravenswing, are you biased or simply lying? JoeC2004 (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Simple. 65.11.23.219 (which has commented twice, not "several" times) is a new editor, but the editor has also participated in fourteen unrelated AfD discussions; you can't claim its only purpose is to back a particular side in this particular discussion. By contrast, after not having appeared on Wikipedia in five months, what brought you back solely for this AfD? Both here and in your edit summaries, you demand adherence to WP:CIVIL, but throwing around accusations of lying and bias does not inspire confidence. Ravenswing 13:58, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Holy Lord in Heaven, you ignored my first question again. Nevermind. You're just commenting on what you want to and ignoring flaws in your tales. What's worse, I'm sure you know that you're doing it intentionally to mislead people. I tried to have a debate, but it is obvious you just want to stroke your ego. JoeC2004 (talk) 14:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I'll leave that up to the investigating admin who applies checkuser to the issue. Ravenswing 14:09, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion in the encyclopedia per WP:BIO. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 05:45, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep Bryan Pisano seems moderately notable. Coaststocoasts (talk) 06:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete due to lack of coverage by multiple independent reliable sources. Also, considering the disruption and blanking of comments above, a checkuser might like to look into some of the accounts that have contributed to this AfD. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 13:43, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Forget It You know what, forget it. I guess other users get some kind of pleasure by calling fellow members of Wikipedia SPAs, so voicing my opinion is worthless. And if you accuse others of being sock-puppets, SheffieldSteel and Ravenswing oddly chime in at almost the same time, saying the exact same thing, not to mention 65.11.23.219 being a clear SPA. You guys are just a pack of liars. Beans are neither friut nor musical (talk) 13:52, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: SheffieldSteel, according to his userpage, is in North Carolina; I'm in Massachusetts. I'm happy with an admin comparing our IP addresses. It's a pity you'd rather make this personal than do what you would need to do to save the article, but that's your choice. Ravenswing 14:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Looking at the history of this page, Beans are neither friut nor musical's first comment was followed, not by a rebuttal, but by Dhartung marking him a SPA. It looks like Beans are neither friut nor musical tried to have a debate, but was brow-beaten into submission. It's clear he didn't make this personal until Dhartung decided to assume the reasoning behind his commenting. It's an unfortuante thing on Wikipedia that stuff like this happens. JoeC2004 (talk) 14:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No sources to verify his notability. Wildthing61476 (talk) 14:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. An actor meets the requirements of WP:BIO if he or she:

Has had significant roles or been featured multiple times in notable films, television, stage performances, and other productions.
Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following.
Has made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to a field of entertainment.

These facts need to be shown from reliable sources. IMDB is not considered a reliable source since some of its information is user-submitted, but it can often be used to track down other information. In this case I am assuming that his appearance in "Failing Grace" was Pisano's most important screen credit, and I tried to learn more about that movie. It was produced by Mansion Media, but I was not able to find a web site for that company. Since the Google hits for 'Failing Grace' are so skimpy and no media coverage has been offered, it seems unlikely to qualify as a 'notable film' for the purposes of WP:BIO. If Pisano has not appeared in any notable films I don't believe there is case for having an article on him. EdJohnston (talk) 14:17, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, EdJohnston for trying to elevate our conversation. You make a good point, and I will not disagree with your statement. JoeC2004 (talk) 14:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Nothing resembling a reliable source in that article. Geocities is often a telltale sign. --Smashville^BONK! 14:41, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note to Closing Admin. Without running a checkuser, it seems that JoeC2004, Dr.orfannkyl and Sgt. bender are most likely one and the same. See the DRV for Gary Hayes. If it looks like a duck... --Smashville^BONK! 14:53, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Oh, my. That does look fairly damning, does it not? Combine that with JoeC2004 and Beans tag-teaming to repeatedly remove SPA tags and delete other comments, it's about time for the pretense to stop. I was going to revert the deletions and send out some talk page warnings, but I think I'll wait for the sockpuppet blocks instead. Ravenswing 15:19, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I was taking to ANI, but it looks like Dhartung has been there, done that and got the t-shirt. And found the DRV. --Smashville^BONK! 15:28, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete doesn't seem to have any major notability. Stifle (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very minor significance is claimed, on the strength of dubious sources -- and all spiced with dribs and drabs of innuendo. I hope his career goes well; if that happens, he can then get an article. -- Hoary (talk) 00:03, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Speaking of his career, it may be worth courtesy blanking this AfD once it's done. No one wants something like this on their resume. SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 02:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply: Not with this being a recreated article, equally not notable. Ravenswing 03:33, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete at this point the article lacks the sources, and the subjects lacks the roles, to prove notability.-- danntm ^T _C 00:14, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete the only vaguely reliable source appears to be the one about scientology, and that doesn't make him notable. David Underdown (talk) 10:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Through all the fun we've had, why don't we just compromise and keep the page? Sgt. bender (talk) 19:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: While I'm unsure how ditching a clear consensus in favor of admitted meatpuppetry and insults constitutes "compromise," rather than state my opinion, I think it's quite seemly to let the closing admin handle this. Ravenswing 19:59, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete More than anything this is a fan page by former student(s) of Pisano's when he was a teacher in upstate New York. It's pretty transparent from the Facebook fan page for him that that is what is going on here. Waste of Wikipedia space.9:59, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

Just because you didn't like Mr. Pisano's history class doesn't mean he's not famous. And by the way, that C in US History was not personal. Sgt. bender (talk) 23:36, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete no reliable sources to establish notability means that it fails WP:BIO, one imdb entry does not IMHO make the grade. --Captain-tucker (talk) 19:55, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.