Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wesley Warren

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. The new users who have come along with personal endorsements carry no weight in the debate, which is one that must be based on wikipedia policy. Regarding the latter, the unanimous consensus of editors applying it is that sufficient notability has not been established in this article with verifiable sources. There is some indication that it may be possible to meet requirements, in which case the best course would be to write up the article in a user sub page and run past experienced editors before uploading in article space. However, it is recommended that the article writer gain wider experience by working on other wikipedia articles first. Ty 02:39, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wesley Warren

Wesley Warren (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Aside from COI issues, I don't believe the subject of this article is notable. He is an artist who opened a coffeeshop and now runs a web design firm. A few local news sources list his coffeeshop, and one story is actually about him. But I don't see the lasting notability and recommend Delete. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 03:54, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete —johndburger 04:15, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

I believe the hundreds of patrons who have collected his work over the past 15 years would disagree. Further more Java Street was not just a coffeeshop - it was the cultural center of St. Petersbur in the mid 90's where thousands of artists, poets and musicians performed and found exposure in a floundering art scene.

Do Not Delete —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.160.70.246 (talk) 05:26, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, 74.160.70.246 is possibly User:Vexcom, who created the page in question—note the IP's edits. WP:SOCK does not appear to apply, but the connection seemed worth noting. —johndburger 00:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Delete shouldn't get his 15 mins of fame here. Dreamspy (talk) 13:03, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

It's amusing but I could care less if it stays or goes - Dreamspy if you think this is 15 minutes of fame perhaps you either A) Overvalue wikipedia or B) Don't get out enough WesleyEWarren (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the page was created by User:Vexcom, also the name of Warren's company. Again, no evidence of puppetry, but I thought it worth noting. —johndburger 00:40, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Hence the COI tag on Wesley Warren. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 00:55, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Yah, but User:WesleyEWarren was created in the meantime—I thought it worth noting that the page creator and all of the dissenters are possibly the same person, or at least closely related. —johndburger 03:18, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 17:27, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete: Standard self-promotion as he has done elsewhere on the net. The 'art' is hardly exceptional either. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 20:55, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Nunquam - Your opinion of my work is "hardly exceptional". Why dont you give me your opinion on what "exceptional" artwork is so I can redefine my beliefs based on your uneducated critique of my paintings. WesleyEWarren (talk) 19:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

"hardly exceptional" was my diplomatic way of saying "complete crap" Nunquam Dormio (talk) 21:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete: Hanging artwork on the walls of a coffee shop you run is self nomination. Rest of the references are trivial. So wont pass WP:BIO. Fountains of Bryn Mawr

- "Hanging artwork on the walls of a coffee shop you run?" Have you even read the entry? My work has been sold in numerous galleries in 4 states. I've produced hundreds of pieces of art. WesleyEWarren (talk) 19:47, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

(talk) 23:28, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as non-notable, does not pass WP:BIO. freshacconcispeaktome 13:03, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Creative professionals

Scientists, academics, economists, professors, authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, engineers, and other creative professionals:

The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WesleyEWarren (talk • contribs)

Yes, but you left out the crucial bit: "The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." (I've added the emphasis). Please see WP:V for what would count for "multiple independent periodical articles or reviews". freshacconcispeaktome 20:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Sorry Freshacconci but you are wrong - the criteria for Creative Professional is met by any of the lines listed - I quoted the appropriate one - the bit you cite is not "crucial" as you say, it is optional as are all the items listed, only one criteria needs to be met, and I have been written up in multiple peridocals, they may be 20 years old and never transfered to the internet but they exists. I suppose I could scan them and upload them If you like. WesleyEWarren (talk) 20:27, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Comment Just a while ago it was "I could care less if it stays or goes" but now WesleyEWarren doth protest too much. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 21:01, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

-- That was before people started insulting me. Now I have decided to turn my attention to it. WesleyEWarren (talk) 21:12, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but verifiability is never "optional". Take a look at that policy, and if your sources meet the standards, I for one may consider changing my !vote. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 20:56, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Not to mention that "The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors" still requires verifiability. And you're written up in 20 year old periodicals? When you were 17? freshacconcispeaktome 21:07, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

-- Your a math wiz Freshacconi- The issue date is 1990 (February), so its 18 years ago and I was 19 - [article has been uploaded]? (The optional comment related to the list of Conditions under Creative Professionals - there is a list of 5 items - all five do not need to be met, one of the five need to be met - this makes the remaining 4 optional - i did'nt mean that the entire case for verifiability is optional) WesleyEWarren (talk) 21:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• WesleyEWarren: "I have been written up in multiple peridocals, they may be 20 years old..." . So that would make it 1988 by your information above, so you'd be 18. You said nothing about it being from 1990. I can only go by the info you gave us. Try some civility. freshacconcispeaktome 22:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete. Fails WP:NOTE and WP:COI. Justin Eiler (talk) 20:51, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Verifiabilty The St. Petersburg Times is one of the most respected newspapers in the Country. http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/access/51843096.html?dids=51843096:51843096&FMT=FT&FMTS=ABS:FT&date=Jun+13%2C+1994&author=PIPER+CASTILLO&pub=St.+Petersburg+Times&edition=&startpage=3&desc=Java+Street+brings+art+and+late-night+coffee+downtown+Series%3A+BUSINESS+DIGEST"

"The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors" Here are peer reviews: http://www.linkedin.com/in/designquote "Recommended 7 people have recommended Wesley E. Warren" WesleyEWarren (talk) 21:17, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per Freshacconci. A write-up about a new coffee shop in a local newspaper can't support the claim that the artist is notable as "widely cited by their peers", or any of the WP:BIO criteria. Perhaps it's a notable cofee-shop, but you'll need to check WP:CORP. (By the way, I know it should be irrelevant to the AfD discussion, but I don't think the inclusion of the artist's work particularly helps the case for keep).--Ethicoaestheticist (talk) 21:58, 29 February 2008 (UTC)
• Comment The St. Petersburg Times article is about Warren as a coffee-shop owner, not an artist. And a link from linkedin.com is of dubious quality per WP:V, esp. per Wikipedia:V#Reliable_sources. freshacconcispeaktome 22:09, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

I beg to differ Ethicoaestheticist From the article (which clearly cites the fact that I am an artists):

A graduate of the Visual and Performing Arts High School in St. Louis, Warren's first love has always been his art. Now, his life is complete with his coffeehouse serving a dual role: business and art gallery. His paintings line the walls of Java Street and in the coming months, he hopes to solicit area artists to use Java Street to display and sell their wares.

Warren, who moved to St. Petersburg to escape the Midwest's cold weather, says his business knowledge came to him indirectly. He spent the last two years living near the campus of Ohio State University in Columbus, where he freelanced graphic designs and frequented coffeehouses with the Columbus art crowd.

"Coffeehouses serve artists well," he says. "It's a easy way for them to get their work seen. I watched more than five coffeehouses open. While doing work for several of them, I learned the business."

Freshacconci - if your reference above is regarding the fact that my paintings were on the walls when I opened for business, then I fail to see the issue. I opened a Coffee House / Gallery, no one had been there yet so when I opened my doors I had paintings hanging up = this doesn't help my case how?

http://www.wesleywarren.com/images/breakfastofchampions.jpg

WesleyEWarren (talk) 22:41, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Do Not Delete - Wes is a well respected business owner in Atlanta and a very accomplished artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jennexner (talk • contribs) 22:59, 29 February 2008 (UTC) — Jennexner (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Do Not Delete - Wesley is a great artist and runs a great company. He is CEO and founder of Vexcom, Inc. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jpsado (talk • contribs) 23:13, 29 February 2008— Jpsado (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Comment Is Jpsado by any chance the Joe Sado, Client Relations Manager of Vexcom and employee of Wesley Warren – see Vexcom Team. If so, it's championship brown-nosing, Joe. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE - Wes is well known and respected in the design industry - Scott Seiter —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.129.32.197 (talk) 23:14, 29 February 2008 (UTC) — 74.129.32.197 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Verifiabilty: Article Scanned And Uploaded surFACE Magazine Volume II, Issue IV February 15, 1990

St. Louis Arts and Entertainment

http://www.wesleywarren.com/Surface_Article.jpg

This should lay the discussion to rest. There are now 4 new sitations listed. ((unsigned|User:Vexcom]]

• Vexcom/WesleyEWarren: First, an administrator will decide if the discussion is laid to rest. Second, you really need to read Wikipedia:V#Reliable_sources. Finally, please also read WP:SOCK. freshacconcispeaktome 00:21, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't think there's a WP:SOCK issue here, but there are definitely single-purpose accounts and IPs. As long as they are tagged as such, it's not a huge deal. Closing admin will take care of it. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 01:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete Evidence of notability extremely thin. Anybody who opens a gallery/coffeehouse knows enough to send out a press release; this often leads to some ink in the weekender section of the local paper. Ewulp (talk) 04:44, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Ewulp - 1) The publication date of the St. Pete Times story is Monday 06/13/1994 - Not a "weekender" - even if it was a "weekender" I don't see how that belittles the source.
2) I was 24 years old and I didn't send out a press release, The reporter found me because I was on her beat. Again - this is irrelevant - even if I did send out a press release, every company on the planet uses press releases to get media coverage, its the editors that determine what is newsworthy. (again this seems to me to be irrelevant)
3) The fact that we got any press is a major accomplishment since the art scene was in such bad shape when we opened. We were an alternative venue with underground bands playing every weekend. We were not a "main stream" business and most of the press in Tampa Bay is very conservative and doesnt cover "alternative" culture. - Java Street was basically underground and off the radar. Makes it difficult to get "main stream reliable media sources" to write about us.
4) We did have a write up in the weekly Creative Loafing, but their on-line archives dont go back that far. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WesleyEWarren (talk • contribs) 06:51, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Additional Publications
I just found a box of old magazines that also have write ups on me, and a box of Local Band 45's that I designed the covers for, as well as several Magazine Covers I designed for Focus Magazine. I will scan them Sunday and add them to the reference material. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WesleyEWarren (talk • contribs) 07:14, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

• DO NOT DELETE

I can see that there is a lot of focus on a specific aspect of the Wesley Warren entry ...one MIGHT say a tremendous amount of focus on a specific aspect of the Wesley Warren entry. But I also take note that: "In 2003 Wesley Warren wrote the algorithm for Ad-ID developed by the American Association of Advertising Agencies and Association of National Advertisers."
and that he has built a fairly impressive business ("develops and manages advanced web applications used by many Fortune 500 companies") in just a handful of years.
Taken as a whole, I have to say that he is undoubtedly a creative person and an entrepreneur. Some seem to question his artistry (nothing unusual about artistry being questioned).
But when it comes to questioning his integrity (references to sockpuppetry, lack of references...) I have to say that I can understand the concern, I think there was/is a HEATED rush to judgement.
Maybe the posters have seem a great deal of this sockpuppetry (maybe too much), but I'd have to imagine SOME of his employees might want to speak in his defense. To my eye, that has not even been considered here.
Lack of references? I came late to this discussion and maybe he was guilty (I don't know) at the start, but you asked and he answered (aside to Wesley, KEEP GOING, SEE THAT YOU, OR WHOEVER, PUT THEM ALL UP).
The path that the references uncovered and its depth were what convinced me that he is a creative person and an entrepreneur.
To his critics, I think that you have to allow that your criticism has made (continues to make) his entry a better entry.
Finally, Self promotion.
You'd have to be a pretty poor entrepreneur to fail at self promotion and we'd all have to be pretty naive to believe that Coke, Pepsi and Microsoft don't promote themselves (or rather HAVE themselves promoted) through the editing of their Wikipedia entries.
How many of us have created a single industry standard after a year in business? How about 2 years? ...5 years?
Read it again, If you take it down now you'll just end up eating crow when you put it back up a mile or two down the road. [JonOfMeans] —Preceding unsigned comment added by JonOfMeans (talk • contribs) 20:08, 1 March 2008 (UTC) — JonOfMeans (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

• Comment The problem is, that the article is not primarily about Warren as an entrepreneur or web developer. As either of those he may be notable, but that would be for other editors to determine as it falls outside my area of knowledge. The main thrust of the article is that he is an artist. However creative he may be, he is not notable by Wikipedia standards as an artist. He is an artist who has had some local shows and some local press, just like hundreds of thousands of other artists around the world. As for the defense of self-promotion, the fact that corporations attempt to write or rewrite their Wiki entries does happen, but there is every attempt made to keep that to a minimum (not to mention that articles on high-profile companies are actually monitored for this sort of thing). This is beside the point anyway: if it happens elsewhere does mean it should be happening, nor does it mean that it should happen here on this article. This has been a case of blatant conflict of interest, as the bulk of the editing has been by Warren himself. freshacconcispeaktome 16:03, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete as NN Johnbod (talk) 21:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Another Newspaper Mention I just found a mention of my ACME art gallery opening in the Columbus Dispatch:

Searched for: "wesley edward warren" AND date(11/9/1990 to 12/1/1993) Returned: 1 displays of 1 matches . To purchase the full-text of an article, click on the headline link. New users will be prompted to create an account.

Publish Date: July 4, 1992 Paper: Columbus Dispatch, The (OH) Page: 01E Word Count: 105 Document ID: 10E0D4435D5AA218

Among the Ohio groups to receive third-quarter grants from the National Endowment for the Arts are the National Black Programming Consortium, $50,000; Ohio State University Research Foundation, four grants totaling $750,000; Ohio Arts Council arts-in-education program, $194,500; the council's basic grant activities, $550,000; and Thurber House, $7,000. Visual arts

Acme announces exhibits

The opening reception for Acme Art Co.'s July exhibits is 7-10 tonight. The

- Problem is the archives are not free, so I cant link to it and thats the end of the text, I had an opening in July there, I still have one of the invites.

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_multi=&p_product=COLNP&p_theme=colnp&p_action=search&p_maxdocs=200&s_dispstring=%22wesley%20edward%20warren%22%20AND%20date(11/9/1990%20to%2012/1/1993)&p_field_date-0=YMD_date&p_params_date-0=date:B,E&p_text_date-0=11/9/1990%20to%2012/1/1993)&p_field_advanced-0=&p_text_advanced-0=(%22wesley%20edward%20warren%22)&xcal_numdocs=20&p_perpage=10&p_sort=YMD_date:D&xcal_useweights=no

If it makes a difference I will pay the $2.95 to purchase the article. WesleyEWarren (talk) 02:02, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete per above, specifically freshacconcispeaktome, Ethicoaestheticist (talk), Ewulp (talk) and Johnbod (talk), and take note of WP:NPA - Modernist (talk) 16:34, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

• DO NOT DELETE
• RE: Comments
  

At the top of the page is a large header that reads in part:
"ATTENTION! "
"please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors"
"deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes."
"Remember to assume good faith on the part of others"
I'd have to say that there is a very dismissive tone to many of these posts (sometimes very curtly dismissive i.e. "Delete as NN" or "Delete. Fails WP:NOTE and WP:COI."). I "get" the arguments, but why no attempt to even address the "merits of the arguments" why no attempt to generate "consensus". Again and again there are requests for more information and references, and when legitimate source materials are provided (what does it matter who provided them ...they are legitimate, they were requested) results in cries of "COI" [so much for considering the "merits of the arguments"]
Again, I think there was a definite rush to judgement and there has been extremely little attempt to re-evaluate that early judgement.
Freshacconci, in your Comments after my last post you say:
"The problem is, that the article is not primarily about Warren as an entrepreneur or web developer. As either of those he may be notable, but that would be for other editors to determine as it falls outside my area of knowledge. The main thrust of the article is that he is an artist. However creative he may be, he is not notable by Wikipedia standards as an artist."
That, to me, sounds like an argument for editing, not an argument for deletion.
In any case, his history IS his history; and the chief reason that these aspects might seem out of balance may have more to do with what his critics have requested of him (and in turn what has been provided) than any other reason. Based on your comments, I encourage you to retract and/or modify your call to delete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JonOfMeans (talk • contribs) 21:55, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment, Having shows in 4 states, produced hundreds of pieces of art, and even producing the most wonderful artwork in the world is great, but it is not Notability. Welcome to the "boring" world of Wikipedia, the primary descriptor of which is that it is an encyclopedia. That means it does not include things that are "pretty" or "wonderful" or "imaginative", or the opinion of any editor who thinks any one thing has those qualities. Wikipedia's core policy is that it is un-imaginative, i.e. we as editors do not rate whether an artist should be included in Wikipedia because we see the art in a lot of places (that’s called original research), or that we think your art is good (that’s called opinion). Wikipedia is not a directory of artist, so to be a biographical article in Wikipedia the subject needs to have been notable beyond the normal "create works, sell them in commercial galleries, get reviews" that all artist do. To be in Wikipedia you need to be included in some manner of higher recognition where you have been singled out, and that recognition has to be published. To be in Wikipedia it is also far better that you not be you (but not necessary ). Fountains of Bryn Mawr (talk) 19:20, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

• Comment So the entry should stay based on:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BIO The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.[6] due to the fact the Wesley Warren wrote the industry standard algorithm for tracking commercials used by the US advertising industry? Perhaps the artwork stuff should be removed or reduced as it is not sufficiently notable? Vexcom (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2008 (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.