Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Price (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 keep. Keeping now as the only outstanding conversation is unrelated to the AfD itself and, if the parties feel it necessary to be continued, should be moved to the users' respective talk pages. (non-admin closure) Go Phightins! 18:36, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Simon Price

AfDs for this article:

• Articles for deletion/Simon Price (2nd nomination)

Simon Price (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · for deletion/Simon Price (2nd nomination) Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not a notable person. Just someone who writes reviews for the Independent. Adhdsloth (talk) 16:29, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 November 18. Snotbot  t • c »  17:03, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
• Weak keep. Someone who has written for several major publications, not just The Indpendent, and whose book received significant coverage. His Twitter spat with Alan McGee also received some coverage. Worth noting that this nomination is the nominator's only contribution to Wikipedia. --Michig (talk) 18:17, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep No new evidence from first nomination, just repetition of vague statement of non-notability. Subject attracts widespread bad faith editing due to his views on pop music and particularly his history as spokesman/media champion for Romo movement which negated alt-music values & so offended many so-called "Real Music" fans. Suggest this nomination is merely another example thereof. 195.92.109.20 (talk) 12:43, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:08, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• Keep His book Everything (A Book About Manic Street Preachers) is widely referenced as an acclaimed and best-selling rock biography. He also has a small role in music history, e.g. with his part in Romo (a movement that's now forgotten, but notable at the time). He's often cited as an expert on the Manics, Morrissey, and other music topics in the British media.[1][2][3][4] There are enough other references to provide background info. Notable as one of Britain's best-known music journalists with a 25 year career, not just a run-of-the-mill hack reviewer. --Colapeninsula (talk) 17:19, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

Would say Romo is still notable in Wikipedia sense! 195.92.109.20 (talk) 17:26, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

• Keep Being a journalist, or publishing best selling books, is not sufficient to be notable. However the book received many published reviews, and the controversy around the book received a lot of press. The book appears to be the canonical book about the Manics making it "significant", in that context. Thus the article passes WP:AUTHOR #3 (multiple reviews) and #4 (critical attention for the controversy). -- Green Cardamom (talk) 19:03, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep. Book was reviewed by The Guardian, controversy over the book was covered by the BBC. Author has received sufficient coverage by secondary sources. Meets WP:GNG.--xanchester (t) 23:49, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep. Would say redirect if only Romo or only Manic Street Preachers connection. But since linked heavily to both and not just one or other, he deserves an article of his own. 95.144.240.119 (talk) 00:45, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Clearly passes WP:GNG, is a notable subject itself. TBrandley 04:09, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep, per above, agreeing also that the page does tend to attract vandalism and bad faith edits for some reason. Hiding T 11:04, 20 November 2012 (UTC)
• Keep. Whoever keeps trolling the community by proposing this article for deletion every couple of years should be sanctioned. --feline1 (talk) 16:11, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Not trolling. Merely stating the fact that Price has written one book and writes reviews for a newspaper. Hardly a notable person. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adhdsloth (talk • contribs) 17:31, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Well as you can see, nobody agrees with you. And creating a sock puppet profile purely for the purposes of getting Simon Price erased from wikipedia is pretty lame, and indeed ahine.--feline1 (talk) 19:18, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Maybe, but, regardles of whether you're personally one of them, there's definitely some person/people out there who do seem to have a bee in their bonnet about Simon Price and the set of values in rock/pop music and style culture that he has stood for in his writing and club promoting - see for example: Talk:Adam_Ant#Simon_Price. 195.92.109.20 (talk) 18:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

The word you're looking for is Romophobia. 95.145.6.12 (talk) 01:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

Well yes, but would everyone on here know that word without explanation? 195.92.109.20 (talk) 13:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

And nominating the Empire State Building for deletion by merely stating the fact that it's not that tall isn't trolling either. I think the correct term when you ignore certain facts to build a hypothesis is "being disingenuous". YMMV. Hiding T 18:00, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

It's nice that his friends are defending him here, but he's hardly Lester Bangs, Greil Marcus, Julie Birchall, Paul Morley, etc (people who have articles about them because their work actually has some intellectual depth about popular culture). I don't think one mistake ridden book about a band, involvement in the "Romo movement" (that barely was) and a few basic reviews of gigs make a person "notable". Adhdsloth (talk) 16:06, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Friends? Well, I'm a big fan of a lot (but not all) of the music he's championed and I've got a lot of time for his pop writing but FYI he and don't get along; in fact he hates my guts! I've met him once and it was very acrimonious to say the least. But even so I wouldn't try to spite him by making him out to be non-notable on Wikipedia. 195.92.109.20 (talk) 11:21, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Adhdsloth, have you ever read the wikipedia WP:DICK policy? You may find it useful--feline1 (talk) 11:57, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

feline1 There's also something about not being rude to other wiki members. Stating one's opinion is not being a "dick". WP:EQ. Adhdsloth (talk) 12:28, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Sorry dude, but you are well past the point where WP:FAITH applies - you've had it calmly and factually explained to you above by over a dozen editors that this article does not meet wikipedia's criteria for deletion, and yet you are still here trolling personal abuse against a living person (see WP:BIO) and moreover, article talk pages are not places for people to "state their opinion": they are for discussing articles with-respect-to policies. You are not doing that; you are instead being a dick. Therefore, please refer to WP:DICK.--feline1 (talk) 12:48, 23 November 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.