Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zachary Jaydon (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 22:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Zachary Jaydon

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/Zachary Jaydon Articles for deletion/Zachary Jaydon (2nd nomination) Articles for deletion/Zachary Jaydon (3rd nomination)
Zachary Jaydon (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Author has worked on this article since last AfD. Has requested that it be re-evaluated. Previously deleted as WP:NN. I declined speedy under Wikipedia:CSD#G4 per his/her request at User_talk:Accounting4Taste#Zachary_Jaydon. Toddst1 (talk) 01:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC) Toddst1 (talk) 01:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete. Yes, he's written plenty of songs, but hasn't received anything amounting to serious coverage from independent sources as far as I can tell. I don't know what the notability criteria are for songwriters, but he doesn't meet WP:BIO. Terraxos (talk) 03:40, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Not only has he written plenty of songs. (Appearing on over 30 MILLION albums,) This fact will be sourced into my article as soon as I have a couple more sources to substantiate it. He has also been getting an increasing amount of magazine coverage as a songwriter/producer as well as being a writer/producer/co-executive producer on a highly anticipated rock album coming out this month. I will be citing a large amount of independent magazine sources in the next day or two. This article is under-construction, and I would like to have an adequate amount of time to finish citing sources and adding information before the subject is deemed "non-noteworthy."

Skyler Morgan (talk) 04:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep, sorry, from your post and the discussion you linked, you make it sound like AfD is some sort of evaluation process, I don't think that's what you mean though, bad wording perhaps? Many of the reliable sources that are linked to don't even mention him, but article makes assertions of notability. The Dominator (talk) 03:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Hes going to say Im 'out to get him' and cite my blog as proof. I wont cite my blog as its obviously my own edits so thats not fair. However everything I have to say here still stands and is proven. Skyler Morgan is Zachary Jaydon (I have an email and screenshots to prove this) so its a clear conflict of interest. He was a bit child actor, an extra, and a filler songwriter (he hasnt written a 'single' or a 'hit'). I dont believe that makes him noteable. The sources dont prove anything and are mostly edited by him including IMDB, Myspace, and Smartpunk. ASCAP proves he wrote a song but it doesnt prove what certification or awards it won. He cant show he won anything for Key to my Heart, Ryan Cabera, or Bledsoe. Nothing is cited for his education or other extra claims beyond imdb which he edits himself so again not verifiable. The 'Mickey Mouse Club Alumni' is true to a point (Keri and Justin were in it) but it seems to hint he was in MMC and we already proved he wasnt on the MMC talk page (though in fairness he didnt out and out claim that here). This article has been deleted twice and the changes arent that vast. It needs to go and he needs to be blocked from editing himself.--Thegingerone (talk) 03:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep as per TGreenburgPR in the previous RFA AFD. Seems notable enough, although he fails WP:BIO there isnt anything that judges the notability of songwriters. Fattyjwoods (Push my button) 03:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
We have that. Check the second section of WP:MUSIC, "Composers and lyricists". Celarnor Talk to me 04:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
The lack of independent sources to prove these 'notability claims' concerns none of you 'keeps'? I could go write an article on myself saying I wrote this and that certified song with no proof and you would vote that keep? The lack of independent sources is one of the majorest issues here.--Thegingerone (talk) 04:01, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
I'd !vote keep if it won awards, hit multi-platinum levels and was verifiable per our policies, yes. Celarnor Talk to me 04:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Remove all the non-secondary and non-reliable sources. Subject has won at least one music award, making him notable. Celarnor Talk to me 04:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
If you remove all the bad sources this will be an unsourced article. Does anyone HAVE a source to prove hes won such awards?--Thegingerone (talk) 04:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Actually, Celarnor Mr. Jaydon has won numerous awards and I appreciate your comment. Anytime an album is RIAA cerified Gold, Platinum, Multi-Platinum or Diamond, ALL people involved with the record receive the award. Without the people writing the music, doing the production, etc. there IS no award because there is no album.

After doing a bit of research, I have found that Wiki DOES indeed have a set of notability guidelines for entertainers. Jaydon meets these criteria in without question. The following was taken directly from WP:N#MUSIC:

Criteria for composers and lyricists

For composers, songwriters, librettists or lyricists:

  1. Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a notable composition.

Jaydon has written material on several Multi-Platinum records, including Justin Timberlake, Craig David, Ryan Cabrera and others. These WERE songs that were included on these albums. They weren't scrapped, or obscure B-Sides. These were songs included on official releases by MAJOR artists. He obviously has notable talent if these artists are choosing to work with him. This is obviously an arguable issue, but given the success of the albums his work has been featured on, it seems at the VERY least, notable.

Below is the resources section of the above link. Ace Title Search is included as one of the few independent places to cite my article. It has been cited and sourced SEVERAL times in my article.

Resources

Good online sources for recordings are the Freedb search engine or the All Music Guide search engine. To find ownership information on song texts copyrighted in the US, the ASCAP ACE Title Search and BMI Repertoire Search utilities are invaluable. When looking in depth, a Google book search may turn something up. For material that has captured the attention of academics, a search on Google scholar may work. An experienced editor also provides a guide on ensuring that articles meet criteria.

Thegingerone does maintain a libelous blog (http://popstressbabble.blogspot.com/) and has of recent been writing grossly negative pieces solely about Mr. Jaydon. This would be a clear Red-Flag in my mind regarding a COI. If it isn't because she hasn't been sourcing her own blog, I would at the VERY LEAST think that it shows her one-sided frame of mind, and inability to write or edit a well balanced article on Jaydon. As far as her "proof" that she speaks of, she makes scandalous assumptions, but I've yet to see ANY sort of "proof" regarding the article that I've written here. Skyler Morgan (talk) 04:25, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

You ARE Mr. Jaydon you crazy crazy man. And oooh you mentioned a blog I already mentioned; Im not going to cite myself thats unfair. My proof stands; you wrote your own article, you cited your own sites, so its all your imagination. Show me an independent site to back your claims and go right ahead and keep the article. But you cant.--Thegingerone (talk) 04:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Please do your best to assume good faith and maintain civility. Celarnor Talk to me 04:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

I have for the record, added the sourcing for the RIAA Gold, Platinum and Multi-Platinum awards Mr. Jaydon has received. They can be easily searched via this link: http://riaa.com/goldandplatinum.php Skyler Morgan (talk) 05:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment. Skyler Morgan appears to be a SPA who's only interest in wikipedia is the promotion of Zachary Jaydon (check contribution history). Thegingerone appears to know Jaydon IRL and appears to intensely dislike him and is determined not to let him self promote here. Both these have a COI and any statement by either of them should be checked rather than taken at face value.Theresa Knott | The otter sank 07:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Amen Theresa. Feel free to check anything I said; its all true. He just added some references with myspace again. --Thegingerone (talk) 07:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The only references that have been added to this article have been cited from Billboard.com and RIAA.com. Both HIGHLY independent and reliable sources. Thank you. Skyler Morgan (talk) 07:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh really? What about the Christopher Paolini part (myspace), and Close to Home part (smartpunk; an online store which you as manager run)? Also for the RIAA info all you have put is [1] which...just goes to a site. It doesnt prove anything ceritified without searching. As for the Justin Timberlake source all you show is ASCAP showing you wrote it; that doesnt show it sold 1 million copies or was used for a promotion. Also these other cites for Golden Globe and mega sellers (like Born to Do it) just show that other people won these awards; not you. All these sources dont prove what they are supposed to other then you penned these songs or that these songs were filler tracks on certain albums.--Thegingerone (talk) 07:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Unfortunately RIAA doesn't allow you to direct link to the information on their page, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and can be searched in under 15 seconds. If you do that, it DOES show Gold, Platinum or Multi-Platinum status of the albums including all of the ones I mentioned in this article. Smartpunk is one of the biggest online retailers of music, and is not user-editable. You may call them for verification if it is that important to you. The fact is, Mr. Jaydon DID write the songs. He did produce the songs. ANYTIME an artist or bands album is RIAA Certified Gold, Platinum or Multi-Platinum, ALL involved with the project are awarded also. That is FACT and can be verified if you feel the need to make the phone call. There are millions of other articles on this site that are half as noteworthy and 1/10th as sourced as this one. LET IT GO. It isn't hurting you, and not a subject you are at all interested in contributing to in a positive manner. I'd love to assume good faith, but its belligerently obvious that this isn't the case here.Skyler Morgan (talk) 20:52, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
With Wikipedia you are supposed to link to something that will show what you are citing; and that does not. I dont know HOW you can do that but Im sure even a 3rd party will disagree. Also this still does not answer the other things I pointed out; none of your sources prove the things they are citing. If Justin's song was used in a major campaign why is there no link to prove it? Good faith doesnt mean letting a crap article squeak by. Just because I kindly question your edits on yourself does not mean Im not being civil on the matter. If you were not your own editor; and could source anything of worth I would have no problem.--Thegingerone (talk) 08:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The Fast Food Promotion you were questioning has been sourced. I would hardly call this a crap article. I am not going to pick apart articles you've written but none of them are sourced nearly as well as this one. I apologize that not every sentence has been sourced here. When you work on an article, think about that. This article IS a work in progress, and I will continue to improve it. I am going to be adding multiple magazine sources tomorrow. I am also looking into how to direct link to information searchable on RIAA's website. Just because I haven't figured out a technical part of it doesn't mean that I haven't provided a source that can be verified or that I'm not trying to improve the source. It also doesn't mean that the article should be deleted. Thanks for understanding.

ALSO, as a sidenote, I think you are losing track of the entire purpose of this discussion, which is the assertion of notability. This isn't an evaluation of Mr. Jaydon. The points you argue will be arguable no matter how well sourced the article is. Saying the a song is a "filler track" just because it wasn't a single is as bogus as me evaluating the quality of a Ben Bledsoe album because it didn't go "Gold." I could argue that "Key To My Heart" MUST HAVE been notable work because it was featured on a Internationally released, Multi-Platinum record, AND was featured in a major animated film. That doesn't mean we both share the same opinion. I don't see you ever being of the same opinion as I and I'm certainly not asking you to. I am asking you to remember what the spirit of Wikipedia is all about, and do be rational with your assertions. This isn't a Jury Trial. The fact of the matter is that by Wiki standards, which are quoted verbatim, Jaydon is notable. It isn't based on editor opinions or anything else. It is based solely on those guidelines. That is all that was up for discussion. Skyler Morgan (talk) 08:58, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Get off your high horse and quit pretending to be someone OTHER then Zachary Jaydon; its just freaky. I actually found your fast food source FINE except for the line should be written; it wasnt 'Justin Timberlake's song' it was NSYNC's. I dont recall seeing anything that showed how much it sold though. And also quit calling quote 'my articles' into question. My articles have been praised up and down (Olive Thomas being one) so quit playing so high and mighty. This has nothing to do with my articles at all; Im not writing about MYSELF. Ben Bledsoe was deemed noteable as he went gold and also was in a band that reached #2 in Germany; but again that has nothing to do with you. It also wasnt WRITTEN by him himself or his 'legal team'. You arent noteable and most of your sources still arent very good. And as stated its already bad enough your writing about YOURSELF. Get over it.--Thegingerone (talk) 10:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
Can I remind you two to stay on topic please. This is a deletion debate about the article Zachary Jaydon. Please stick to that topic only. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 11:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 16:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep This article passes WP:BIO Ijanderson977 (talk) 20:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep From WP Notability (music) and information from ASCAP, meets WP:BIO notability. That isn't to say the article doesn't need work. The RIAA references are not helpful, there must be other sources out there that clearly supports the certification claim. However, the ASCAP source is independent and a valid source that does support songwriting credits. There is no place for the MySpace reference based on WP:EL, and in a few places, the wrong thing is being sourced. The article is badly in need of clean up and editing to bring it into encyclopedic form, . Wildhartlivie (talk) 00:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

As a note to all reading, I have replaced most of the "RIAA" links with reliable independent sources regarding RIAA certification of the albums mentioned on Jaydon's pages. I was trying to get it directly from the "horses mouth" but there doesn't seem to be ANY way to direct link to facts on the RIAA website. It would have to be searched at the "RIAA" link provided, however I think the current sourcing is more appropriate. I will be continuing to clean up the article this evening. Skyler Morgan (talk) 04:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep He meets WP Notability (music) although the article does need cleanup work to bring it into encyclopedic form. It seems like a number of the mentioned issues with the article have been cleaned up already.

74.215.40.191 (talk) 09:24, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

    • The above user has only 4 contributions including this one, and the other three are all for a single purpose. I smell a sock. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 19:50, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Or it could be a new user ... Celarnor Talk to me 20:17, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
Of course it could be a new user. However new users in my experience tend to start with articles or article talk pages. Theresa Knott | The otter sank 09:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
74.215.40.191 is Zachary Jaydon/Skyler Morgan/Tragedy Striker (all one person there). Note his comments on the Valentino page; his first edit. Why would a no0b post things about me that Jaydon has been so adamant posting exactly the same here? I cant believe people are still nominating this as keep. Beyond inflated claims (I have given and accepted some things here are true) this is an article written by Zachary Jaydon himself; which I just find a major conflict but APPARENTLY thats just me.--Thegingerone (talk) 05:59, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
Quit deleting my comments; Theresa brought the subject up and just because it is you and you dont want to look guilty doesnt mean you can delete it.--Thegingerone (talk) 22:37, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Please assume good faith. The 'keep' vote and associated comments were deleted, via suggestion by an admin. I was doing it to avoid drama with you specifically, but it always creeps up with you anyway. Not surprising. Regardless of your comments, the majority has spoken, the article has been properly cited. The subject meets Wiki notability guidelines which is the only thing up for debate here. This isn't a trial. Skyler Morgan (talk) 01:04, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Whomever who you talked to gave you bad advice: Removing others' comments is not OK. In fact, you shouldn't remove your comments if you wish to retract them on a page like this. The custom is to strike through your comments Toddst1 (talk) 12:28, 7 April 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.