Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tony Pierce

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pfrankenstein (talk | contribs) at 02:07, 4 December 2006. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Tony Pierce (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Fails WP:BIO hard. Vanity and self-promotion. Apparently this guy did nothing in his life except writing in blogs. Femmina 21:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete Sorry, blogfather. This guy is a dime a dozen. Just H 23:31, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - As bloggers go, he appears popular, popular enough that G4tv interviewed him. [1]--Oakshade 00:08, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - G4tv inteviewed him about his blogs. Absolutely non-notable blogs I might add. Exactly to my point. The guy did nothing else whatsoever in his life. - Femmina 00:47, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • If he or his blogs weren't notable, they wouldn't have bothered interviewing him. --Oakshade 01:44, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Maybe G4tv folks had 10 spare minutes in 2004. I see no hints at notability in the interview. They ask him how bloging so much is like and he says he enjoy doing it. And that's all. - Femmina 08:01, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • It seems you've never worked in broadcast journalism (I have for national networks that you've likely watched). They don't waste 10 seconds on something non-notable. --Oakshade 08:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • That's true, I'm not a journalist. Wait. How do you know I'm not a journalist? Is my computer broadcasting an IP address or something? Anyway, he's been interviewed once by G4tv and I was unable to find any other claim of notability. Is that single short interview enough to justify the presence of his biography on wikipedia? - Femmina 08:52, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as failing WP:BIO. bikeable (talk) 02:06, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom and WP:BIO. Running a blog (or a hundred) does not make you notable. --timecop 03:13, 3 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Obviously I'm biased in this discussion since I am Tony Pierce, and maybe nowadays running a blog is no big deal, but in August 2001 when I started the busblog there weren't 54 million blogs going. Anyways, I was on G4TV not for my blog, but for the "blook" that I wrote called "How To Blog" which won an award at SXSW. I've also been interviewed in the New York Times for being addicted to the web (http://community.livejournal.com/blog_sociology/78243.html), written about in the Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47633-2004Oct20.html), and named in the LA Times (http://www.craigslist.org/about/press/LAwideweb.html) as the most entertaining blog in LA. True my personal blog busblog.com (http://busblog.com) lately isn't what it used to be, but that's because I now blog for a living as Editor of LAist (http://www.laist.com/), but everyone has made a career and a living out of blogging these days, right? In 2002 I coined the word blook (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blook) which is turning parts of your blog into a book, a word that is dorky, true, but was up for Word of the Year this year by the Oxford Dictionary (http://blog.tomevslin.com/2006/10/blook_is_a_runn.html). Again, achievements I'm sure you've all reached. I'd have cleaned up this wikipedia entry on myself but as you can see from this note I'm not so skilled with your interface. I guess that's why I still use Blogger.com, speaking of which I was sitting next to Ev the night he announced that Google had just bought Blogger (http://www.tonypierce.com/blog/2003/02/only-guy-who-had-better-day-than-me.htm) just like Amanduhh's mom? She looked alot like Xeni Jardin. And I was one of just 20 bloggers given free trips to Amsterdam by the Dutch government this year and put up in 5 star hotels to blog about the city (http://www.bloggersinamsterdam.com/blog/), and and and... but blogging is irrelevant to you guys so whatevs. And yeah I realize I don't get the amount of hits of some of the bloggers in the Technorati Top 100 but personal sites that state right up front that "nothing in here is true" dont really stand a chance of popularity unless youre a whorish hot chick or a political partisan and yet still somehow I am in the Technorati Top 500 (currently i'm #428) (http://www.technorati.com/search/www.tonypierce.com). I agree lots of bloggers can claim that they "belong" here, but how many have achieved these things while being more popular than 99.999% of the rest? Maybe the kids just liked my photo essays (http://www.tonypierce.com/photoessays.htm)? Regardless of what you choose to do, there's no doubt that I was one of the early leaders of blogging, and definitely one of the more influential ones, and now a professional one. Therefore I believe that my entry should stay. But if it goes, that's ok. I did well without Wikipedia, I will live without it. Plus people know where to find me since Google has me listed right below the Tony Awards and Tony Hawk when you simply type "tony" into Google (http://www.google.com/search?q=tony). Thankfully they're not blog-haters :) Now that I read some of your snarks, it seems like the problem here is in the entry not being very good, not the subject. However, if I had written this entry then you would have tried to bust me for self-promotion. So there's the rub. TP 23:23, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Nothing in Pierce's missive above is notable. Tfg 00:17, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Fails WP:BIO. --Cam 00:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep You HAVE got to be kidding me. Tony is the Blogfather. And somebody that says "Sorry Blogfather" is somebody that knows just how important Tony really is.
* Keep Saying that Tony hasn't done anything of note is like saying Kit Marlowe never did anything of note. pfrankenstein