Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tama Girard

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. Vanamonde (talk) 13:11, 20 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Tama Girard

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

No evidence of notability. A passing mention is the best one can find in independent sources, about his song on the soundtrack of an Emmy-winning documentary, or as an entry as one artist in a long list of artists performing somewhere. No indepth coverage from independent sources at all. Fram (talk) 13:38, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No evidence of notability. Advertising/vanity article created by article subject. reddogsix (talk) 15:28, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I was initially convinced that the "Emmy-winning documentary" was a hoax as it's fairly elusive on Google and nowhere to be found on the Emmys website, but to save any other editors the trouble, here it is: The Impact of Your Choice is apparently a driver's education film from 2009. A Train^talk 15:38, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. These are the New England Emmy Awards, a regional subdivision of the "real" Emmy Awards (they are also real, not a hoax indeed, but not what one expects when it is said that X has won an Emmy Award). Fram (talk) 16:25, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Here is a link to the artist and his contribution to the art of, art within, and the collaborated works of the referenced artist Nuno Bettencourt (within the article), sourced and referenced by both MTV and Viacom: Tama Girard Sold for Free (feat Nuno Bettencourt) is apparently referenced here MTV/Viacom as a recognized original piece of work created by both artists in a collaboration). Singsingery (talk) 20:32, 7 September 2016 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Singsingery (talk • contribs) [reply]

Comment. Here is another notable mention, discussion, interview from a cited radio station (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WSUB-LP?wprov=sfla1) 96.7 FM The BUZZ www.thebuzz967.com referencing and citing his contributions to film and music composition, and his creations and collaborations with Jeff Russo, Nuno Bettencourt, and debuting their original works together, in full FCC radio broadcast, all mentioned within the subjects article. The discussion of subject and artist's article, has been cited and referenced from news, newspaper, radio and media publications. Singsingery (talk) 16:37, 10 September 2016 (UTC) (talk • contribs)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 02:22, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I don't think we have the reliable source depth that's necessary for a biographical article. His work has gotten discussed in various blogs and the like, fine, but that's not truly encyclopedic. I also support deletion. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. There is in-depth noted coverage, and the finding now is., Although these articles appear to be similar, their publish ID numbers, article ID numbers, dates of articles published, are all published at different times and platforms, cited by notable news and media referencing an "Emmy Award" win, which is recognized in prior (commets above, July 10, 2009 publication) as "Notable" and recognized, referenced and cited through Wikipedia articles. This is after all, an Emmy Award win, and did actually happen and cited by notable references in several published articles, multiple times and multiple publications. If any other editors are looking for the difference in these published article IDs and dates, you can see the difference Seekonk School herein one of the other publications, released on a different platform, location, and published dates. The standout, notariety, and the significance of why this article should remain, is this documentary actually become part of a "school curriculum" used for education, and also used by state and federal law enforcement agencies, to educate teens, making its mark in history by independent film documentary, being incorporated and utilized as a state , town and federal resource. Reference, Seekonk Massachusetts, The Impact of Your Choice is apparently released in several separate publications. This cited and referenced publication is from August 7, 2009. Singsingery (talk) 01:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I've done a little more in-depth research about the Emmy award winning documentary, "The Impact of Your Choice". There are substantial citations from State and Federal agencies referencing the this documentary and it's significant role as an educational resource and Emmy Award achievement. This documentary's has become a widely used resource, nationally. Here are just a few links files from news, state and federal government acknowledgement and citations. News in the State of R.I. [1]. Fall 2007 Edition - Rhode Island Department of Corrections - RI.gov [2]. Superintendent's Annual Report - East Providence School District [3]. Singsingery (talk) 03:09, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Please only vote once. You are making a case for the documentary here, but the AfD is for the artist who contributed a song to the soundtrack of the documentary. The documentary didn't become part of a curriculum because of the song or the artist. Fram (talk) 07:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm sorry about the the extra vote text, it was meant to be a comment. As far as the extra added in-depth research on the Documentary, it was and has been mentioned throughout the conversation and debate here, the validity of both. -The documentary, and the artist, in question., In the understanding that one claim of each, (the artist and the documentary), support the other.. -Listed and citing the artist as "original contributions", which takes part in creating the entire project . So again, one claim directly supports the other claim. The stronger case, claim, cites, and contribution of the Documentary itself, makes any claim of anyone's involvement and contribution in "creating" that piece of work, is an integral part of the creation's whole, facilitating the success, achievements and mission of the of these documentary. The artist and subject has a significant amount, and enough of an apparent "contribution" to the documentary, to be noted, cited and referenced for his "original" work and "creative" contribution facilitating Emmy win, in several publications. I'm not sure if you found some evidence through your research claiming that the artist did "not" have any contribution to the success, Emmy win, or the documentary becoming a widely used and sought after resource? I'm only asking because, your comment is stating that direct projection, after it (Emmy win citing), and the subject of this article, have been cited, recognized and referenced several times. If so, I'm just wondering if you could reference that finding in your next comments. Thank you. Singsingery (talk) 08:01, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

While I obviously can't find sources that explicitly state that the song did not contribute, that's proving a negative. But there's plenty of evidence from the omission of any mention of the song or artist from articles about the documentary. The three bolded sources in your comment above are a case in point, as not one of these (If I checked correctly) mentions the song or artist, but still you use them to advocate keeping an article on the artist. Well, the second and third don't even seem to mention the documentary either, so I'm not sure what they are meant to show. Fram (talk) 12:24, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. It seems the "majority" of the references you're referring to, most of the creators and contributors were omitted, as this article and files are a "mission statement" only, rather than a news and accrediting platform.. The places where the "news" seemed appropriate and should have been, was actually listed, cited and referenced multiple times in above mentioned and cited articles. This documentary and it's creators, have been cited and referenced multiple times, supporting the claim of all information regarding the artist and subject, without any evidence to deny, debunk or facilitate the deletion of this page and article. Singsingery (talk) 08:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Have you read our notability guidelines like WP:BIO? That the information in the article is true and verifiable isn't sufficient, the subject (in this case, the artist) must have received significant, indepth attention in reliable, independent sources. Being mentioned in an article about a different subject (like the documentary) isn't enough by far. Fram (talk) 12:54, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Neither here in this discussion nor in the article itself can I see evidence of notability. Mentions, tangential mentions, endorsements yes, all of those, but nothing that indicates any significant notability from reliable sources. This looks like severe over-hype - "Me thinks the lady doth....etc. etc". Velella ^{Velella Talk} 15:13, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Hmmm.. Im not sure why you're not seeing it. I just revisited the above referenced source files .. Page 24, within Superintendent and added curriculum. And Page 8, "Addressing DUI" in The State of Rhode Island department of corrections. Singsingery (talk) 09:16, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. They indeed mention the documentary, for some reason "search" didn't return this. The main problem remains, neither of these mentions the artist (who is the subject of this deletion discussion, not the documentary!). Fram (talk) 13:21, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Yes, you're quite right. But there, they shouldn't be., -as these are mission statements and not a platform for credits of creation. This was merely an entry of why and how this original work, (referenced in "original composition and created works" by the subject article), was utilized and resources facilitating significant meaning behind the documentary's mission, warranting it a Winning Emmy Award. Within this understanding., This Documentary does in-fact incorporate creative works and original compositions, by the subject and article, and cited by news articles in above mentioned references, and in page references. This in itself, is, are, and continues to be the the "cited and noted facts"., This process exists for exactly this reason. Thank you for your feedback.. Singsingery (talk) 09:58, 12 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Here is yet another cited resource, regarding and crediting the artist/subject of the article, for his direct and significant contribution of "Original Works" for the Emmy Award "win" of "The Impact of your Choice"., This crediting was directly from the producer for this documentary, during an interview heard here, on July 16, 2009 (forward interview to 49:00), on Dreamvisions Radio Network , (Wikipedia Sourced) [Interview with Deborah Hoch Producer July 16, 2009, 10:35 am] Singsingery (talk) 19:56, 13 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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.