Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/AJ Perez (blogger)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Killerdork (talk | contribs) at 00:25, 20 August 2013 (AJ Perez (blogger)). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

AJ Perez (blogger) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unconvinced of the notability of this blogger; he seems to have published an article about a very minor celebrity, but despite press coverage, that is not enough for notability. WP is NOT A TABLOID. There's a limit to the triviality we cover, and nobody can become notable by publishing something not remotely worth our inclusion. The GNG, like everything here, is subject to common sense, but for what we include and what we exclude. DGG ( talk ) 18:05, 19 August 2013 (UTC) DGG ( talk ) 18:05, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

AJ Perez (blogger)

Hello DGG! I am the one who created this article that you are now considering for deletion, may I appeal your decision to recommend this page for deletion because the subject is indeed gaining prominence in my country today. Also, wiki has allowed subjects who have lesser stature to be published with less, or even without public following: eg:

1. Florentino Floro 2. Louie Jon Agustin Sanchez 3. Bryanboy 4. Rodne Galicha

...and more.

As of now, in my research, the subject has 250,000 followers and half a million readers[1] and it maybe a minor celebrity by North American standards but it is already big by Philippine standards, see # 2 of WP:ENT. Further research that the subject has followers from outside the Philippines as well on a big number. I agree that " WP is NOT A TABLOID. There's a limit to the triviality we cover, and nobody can become notable by publishing something not remotely worth our inclusion." But the subject is beyond the criteria of triviality by WP, as proven by the approval of people wikis cited above by the editors of WP.

Also, the "very minor celebrity" Janine Tugonon that the subject wrote about was the Miss Universe 2012 first runner-up and was considered a Filipino heroine (until her recent bad press)who has her won wiki page therefore is considered not a "very minor celebrity." Considering her as a "very minor celebrity" is an encyclopedic bias against Filipinos. But also, the subject gained prominence again when he wrote about the Filipino migrant worker abuses in the Philippines-Taiwan rift, which in no way is a very minor issue.

The article, when I did it is guided by WP:GNG, WP:SIGCOV and WP:NRVE

Consider this, like the people wiki articles I cited above, you have an entry about Danny Sillada who like the subject gained instant prominence in a one-time event. However, his work of art was seen by relatively few people (and awareness that goes with it) vs. the work the subject did. Does that mean WP considers the art of blogging a lesser form of art than painting? Since more has seen subject's work rather than Sillada's, isn't notability more in the subject's favor?

Or we can consider this article a stub in the meantime, which is okay too.

Please consider my appeal sir, thank you very much! I am pushing for this because I am confident the subject is gaining notability and is worthy of an encyclopedic entry like those people mentioned above. comment added by Killerdork (talkcontribs) 21:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment: I don't have an opinion about this article, but your reasoning that it should be kept because there are similar articles on Wikipedia is an argument that seldom carries much weight; please see WP:OTHERSTUFF. If you can provide examples of the coverage she's received—even bad press—that's what's most likely to demonstrate her notability. —rybec 22:45, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment: Thank you for the heads-up! A quick google search with keywords "Janine Tugonon" you could see all the worldwide press she has received. Now, for the subject himself, I believe that in the article itself, I have diligently put citations from credible 3rd party sources (following WP:NOTABILITY esp, WP:GNG) that will demonstrate that the subject has been covered by various, big, media outlets in the country, see [AJ Perez(blogger)]. Cited sources came from ABS-CBN, GMA Network, The Philippine Star, Davao Catholic Herald which are big and respected media conglomerates in the subject's country. Also, as I have cited above, the subject has a recorded 250,000 readers. Maybe small by North American standards, but already huge in the subject's country of origin. Thanks sir! Killerdork (talkcontribs) 22:52, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 18:35, 19 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]