620:. How a newspaper does not count towards being a credible source. I feel as if I am not supposed to respond again, but my response is needed. The jacket seen on Michael for Thriller and Beat it, are they not referred to as the Thriller and Beat it jackets? The only difference is that Michael did not express his feelings for those jackets as he did the black sequin jacket. Michael never named his jackets, so we, when referring to them, call them what they were. The song name's jacket. I sourced and proved Michael's love for that particular jacket, also referring exactly to the Motown jacket. Obviously, he had more made, because he wore it for his entire career. That is not my opinion, that is witnessed by every spectator. Billie Jean is the only song Michael played at every performance. For every performance of Billie Jean, since Motown, Michael wore the black sequin jacket. Are what people witness for 25 years not a credible source? Especially when we can say everyone can witness Michael's performances to see him wearing the jacket. What am I or anyone else supposed to presume it is? I do not understand.
695:. How are they reliable?! The other sources used in the article merely show pictures of Jackson wearing a jacket that never stated was the "Billie Jean black sequin jacket". The article will not be able to meet Knowledge (XXG) requirements because there is simply not enough information. On another note, @Chzz, I checked the articles history, prior to the AfD you significantly contributed to the article, so while you are not a fan of Jackson (that eliminated the bias factor) you've played a prominent role in this article, which, IMO, does kinda give you a decrease in creditably since you are not an outside-editor to this article, just sayin'. I think the article should be deleted for now and then once Pyrrhus16 article is made, be redirected.
663:(struck, see below) I have been following this debate with interest, and have researched it on the net. I believe that the subject is independently notable, due to the 'significant coverage in reliable sources'. The current article certainly needs work; the FUR video needs sorting out/removing, the pic is inappropriate,etc. But, AfC is a discussion to decide if an article can be fixed up. I ask the closing admin to remember that this is a discussion, not a vote. Re. draft of MJ fashion -that's great; perhaps one day, when that is live, this can be merged into it - but, that does not exist yet. I helped this new user to create their first article via
583:. Your "sources" show pictures and/or videos of Jackson wearing a jacket, which you presume to be the jacket in question, no where in the links does it say that the jacket Jackson is wearing is the Billie Jean jacket. Regarding the quote about the fan being given the jacket, the source does not confirm the story, they only report what that person claimed. Also, "I strongly believe" is not a reliable source either. This jacket does not need its own article, it can easily be mentioned with Pyhruss16's article.
408:
need it's own article. I can see that you (as well as another editor) put a lot of work in it, but, the article is clear fan cruft that is mainly quotes. The sourcing, is quite frankly, very bad; ref. 4 and ref. 8 is an unreliable source, refs 6, 9, 10, 11 are
Michael Jackson fan sites. I stand by my comment that this jacket does not need its article. Although I do agree with Pyrrhus 16's comment (below) that mention of this jacket should be included in the page he has in his user sandbox. Thanks,
667:, and their willingness to discuss here is commendable - yes, they don't know all about our conventions yet, but their willingness to discuss and listen is what AfD is designed to achieve. In all discussions, the primary editor has been extremely cooperative and willing to make any changes to satisfy Knowledge (XXG) requirements. Note, I am not, and never have been, a fan of Jackson - I strive to deal with all topics with equanimity.
633:
two remaining significant items from
Michael's career, because they are clearly more significant than Michael's other fashions, and that is not my opinion, even though I am stating it, it is witnessed by analyzing Michael's career. However, I am pretty sure we will not find an account of Michael saying the name of the jacket or that it is the highest fashionable jacket he has and uses. But do not action speak louder than words?
212:, a photo that has no purpose of use on that page, and a majority of the article consist of nothing but long block quotes. I've checked who created this page as well as other editors who frequently edit this article, unsurprising, 2/3 of them are Michael Jackson fans; this article, from what I can see, is clear fan cruft.
297:, he was making a fashion comeback. Since Motown 25 he has always worn his black sequin jacket, white glove and moonwalked for the song Billie Jean. Those are all significant. There is a Billie Jean page, a Motown 25 page, and a moonwalk page. How can there not be a Billie Jean black sequin jacket page?
632:
The black sequin jacket, signature glove and Fedora, where the only items
Michael used his entire career, for again every performance, along with the moonwalk. Could you please explain why these very special items will not receive their own wiki pages? There is a Fedora wiki page, so that only leaves
499:
I am the only one working on the article, besides help from wiki help members. I would appreciate very much the opportunity to show how notable the jacket was. Wait a little while and watch how credible and referenced the wiki will be. The internet is full of fake duplicated Billie jean attire. Allow
407:
Hi, I didn't mean to come off rude or anything with the "zero notability" comment (I'm a fan of
Jackson myself) but, while I completely understand that the jacket is significant to Jackson (he wore it during the Billie Jean performance, which was a highlight in his career), the jacket itself does not
300:
The video I use in the article is in the wiki commons, and used on the
Moonwalk wiki page. I use it, because it is currently the only FREE picture/video showing Michael Jackson in his black sequin jacket. As for the other picture, it looks better than no picture, and I do mention it is not the Billie
480:
I must respectfully disagree, as I strongly feel my sources fully prove each noted fact about the jacket. Ref. 4 is merely a link to the video of the Motown performance, the full version, and not a few seconds of just
Michael moonwalking. That is just to show him in his jacket, and it being from the
484:
Ref. 8 is the EMP website, who hosted an exhibit showcasing the Billie Jean black sequin jacket and a single decorated glove. There was no song or Mr. Jackson; tickets were only purchased to see the jacket and glove. Two very iconic pieces of memorabilia, and as expected it was a spectacular event.
503:
Beside the Billie Jean jacket, the glove could very easily be made into its own wiki page, but everything else was indeed not nearly as notable as the jacket and glove. So I apologize, but respectfully disagree with the idea that the gloves along with others are not appropriate for their own wiki
368:
Notability of one or more members of some group or class of subjects may or may not apply to other possible members of that group. Discuss based upon the individual subject, not the subject's overarching classification or type. If a subject under discussion is independently notable, provide the
430:
for now. I'm writing an article on
Jackson's fashion style as a whole, and this can be redirected there once it is completed. There is no need for an individual page on this. Individual articles could be made for his glove, white socks, finger tape, surgical mask, etc, but it would not be
308:
I have filled the article with nothing but absolute truth, backed up by news articles, actual quotes, and newspaper sources. I have altered some sources to make it much more accurate and blog free, I do apologize very much for the use of the blogs and have removed them entirely!
488:
Ref. 6 is proof of the other fan being given a jacket; the newspaper is there to back up the story. Only 2 recorded instances of
Michael ever giving so beloved of his away. Ref. 9 is the actual newspaper to collaborate the story, clearly showing the date, publication and editor.
375:
I have made many alterations, and feel that I have gathered a good deal of significant sources showing that
Michael's Billie Jean black sequin jacket was adored by him. It was the look and feel along with his Billie Jean song that are significant items that made him famous.
500:
people to read, remember and understand the real story. If it were not significant
Michael and Janet would not be answering questions about it and clearing up misconceptions of any kind. Perhaps the jacket is much more notable than you may think…I definitely believe it is.
289:, his black sequin jacket and white single decorated glove. Those are iconic, significant and culturally important, says our government. The album Thriller is considered culturally revolutionizing, and that is mainly because of Billie Jean and his attire during his
507:
I strongly believe that if people were not even familiar with Michael, they could distinguish who he is by the jacket, glove, moonwalk and Billie jean song. Those three definitely deserve their own wiki page. Everything else I agree should be part of his fashion.
624:
Are you saying that you can sit and watch every performance of Michael since Motown and say the jacket he wears for Billie Jean is anything but the jacket Michael expressed feelings about, or another he had specially made, that I have shown in the wiki page.
281:
I understand what you mean, I apologize very much, but I am not a fan writing the article. I am merely familiar on the subject. I went through and made more accurate sources, but none of my sources go to a main page, except to show the newspaper and story.
628:"I strongly believe" was never meant to be a source, it is my knowledgeable opinion on the subject matter. I in no way want to sound rude, but I am truly confused, I almost feel as if I and the article are being bashed, instead of thoroughly explained.
738:
for now; per above, but after extensive discussions with the user and others, we agree the best option is to userfy for now, with a view to improvement and possible merger into an article on MJ fashion, and perhaps a redirect to the applicable section
304:
The article is not bias by any means, and is absolutely significant, as it is the jacket he wore for every performance of his biggest song Billie Jean. I feel that I have done a very good job establishing the facts of the jackets significance.
495:
I very much feel that the work is indeed credible. The 2 quotes are there to show Michael’s love for the jacket. One quote is by his sister Janet Jackson and the other is by Michael Jackson. Each source is used accurately and appropriately.
476:
Hello, No worries, I appreciate your courtesy and your response very much, as well as Pyrrhus. It must be crazy not only checking and verifying, but also organizing so many wiki’s. I can only imagine how many you probably go through.
169:
379:
The jacket would be considered a member of the notable persons group, which is indeed significant. He wore the jacket for over 25 years. It was a significant part of Motown 25, creating his super-stardom.
492:
Ref. 10 is probably a fan site, but proves nothing more than tour dates, and I will gladly find a more credible source. Ref. 11 is from NEWSWEEK, one of the largest magazine publications available.
263:
The jacket seems to have been mentioned enough to be notable in the WP sense. I would have guessed that 3/3 of the contributors to this article would have been MJ fans, not just 2/3. :-)
163:
691:"due to the 'significant coverage in reliable sources" There are no reliable sources that discuss the jacket. A good portion of the article is filled with sources that are from
124:
97:
92:
101:
84:
239:. And although it appears to be well-sourced, if you follow all the sources, you'll find that they lead to either blogs or just plain unreliable sources (especially
129:
559:- there is no need to respond to every single comment by other users in this Afd. Make your arguments for keeping the article once, succinctly and leave it be. –
637:
Surely this will not make anyone change their minds, but it is important that it is read. Thank You so much again...How do I go about redirecting the article?
184:
151:
285:
I apologize, but I do not understand what you mean by zero notability. We are talking about a superstar whose career began with the song
504:
page. The history of the gloves and Billie jean jacket are absolutely iconic and notable from the most recognized person on the planet.
646:
520:
395:
325:
17:
756:
728:
701:
684:
650:
610:
589:
568:
543:
524:
465:
445:
414:
399:
350:
329:
272:
255:
218:
66:
713:
with/to Pyrrhus16's Michael Jackson fashion article once it's ready for mainspace. One article on MJ fashion should be enough. --
145:
200:
I feel that this article should be deleted because, in my opinion as an experienced editor on Knowledge (XXG), the article has
383:
The Billie Jean jacket is more significant than any other jacket and is iconic to Michael Jackson and his song Billie Jean.
141:
88:
774:
191:
36:
80:
72:
699:
587:
412:
216:
723:
773:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
157:
313:
642:
516:
391:
321:
59:
338:
235:
the rest. While I disagree that the article has zero notability, the article as a whole seems to violate
696:
584:
409:
213:
204:
Aside from this article not being notable, it barely has any sources (most of which are unreliable), a
606:
439:
177:
268:
236:
638:
564:
556:
512:
461:
387:
317:
50:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
539:
346:
251:
664:
531:
602:
228:
749:
677:
433:
719:
511:
I respectfully ask you please, reconsider deletion of my article. Thank You So Much,
264:
301:
Jean jacket, so I really do not understand what you are referring to there as well.
560:
457:
118:
240:
427:
286:
294:
742:
670:
290:
714:
293:
appearance. Michael has always been a fashion icon, and now for the
767:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
243:). The external links even lead to ABC News and Newsweek's
618:
I am very sorry, but I am still confused on several things
114:
110:
106:
176:
532:
even though you created the article, it isn't yours
190:
601:to the above fashion piece, include the pictures.
481:quotes and the jacket he gave to Sammy Davis Jr.
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
777:). No further edits should be made to this page.
579:@ User:DinhoGauch10, all of your sources are
8:
362:I referred to the link ^^ you provided:
210:no reason for non-free use in the article
555:: And a further friendly suggestion for
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
24:
81:Billie Jean black sequin jacket
73:Billie Jean black sequin jacket
1:
359:I appreciate your response.
794:
757:18:45, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
729:18:15, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
702:13:57, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
685:06:33, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
651:14:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
611:08:50, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
590:01:42, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
569:19:56, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
544:17:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
525:14:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
466:02:17, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
446:23:42, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
415:01:46, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
400:14:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
351:14:56, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
330:14:45, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
273:13:01, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
256:07:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
219:07:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
67:18:35, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
48:per author's own request.
693:Michael Jackson fan sites
770:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
229:Michael Jackson#Fashion
227:much of the article to
369:evidence to show that.
540:(let's talk about it)
347:(let's talk about it)
252:(let's talk about it)
530:Just so you know,
44:The result was
755:
727:
711:Merge or redirect
683:
581:original research
557:User:DinhoGauch10
542:
349:
337:Consider reading
333:
316:comment added by
254:
785:
772:
754:
752:
746:
740:
717:
697:Crystal Clear x3
682:
680:
674:
668:
585:Crystal Clear x3
538:
442:
436:
410:Crystal Clear x3
345:
332:
310:
250:
214:Crystal Clear x3
202:zero notability.
195:
194:
180:
132:
122:
104:
65:
62:
53:
34:
793:
792:
788:
787:
786:
784:
783:
782:
781:
775:deletion review
768:
750:
744:
741:
678:
672:
669:
474:
440:
434:
311:
137:
128:
95:
79:
76:
60:
51:
49:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
791:
789:
780:
779:
762:
760:
759:
732:
731:
707:
706:
705:
704:
688:
687:
635:
634:
622:
621:
614:
613:
595:
594:
593:
592:
574:
573:
572:
571:
547:
546:
473:
470:
469:
468:
450:
449:
420:
419:
418:
417:
373:
372:
371:
370:
354:
353:
276:
275:
258:
206:non-free video
198:
197:
134:
130:AfD statistics
75:
70:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
790:
778:
776:
771:
765:
764:
763:
758:
753:
748:
747:
737:
734:
733:
730:
725:
721:
716:
712:
709:
708:
703:
700:
698:
694:
690:
689:
686:
681:
676:
675:
666:
662:
661:
657:
656:
655:
654:
653:
652:
648:
644:
640:
631:
630:
629:
626:
619:
616:
615:
612:
608:
604:
600:
597:
596:
591:
588:
586:
582:
578:
577:
576:
575:
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
551:
550:
549:
548:
545:
541:
537:
533:
529:
528:
527:
526:
522:
518:
514:
509:
505:
501:
497:
493:
490:
486:
482:
478:
471:
467:
463:
459:
455:
452:
451:
448:
447:
443:
438:
437:
431:appropriate.
429:
425:
422:
421:
416:
413:
411:
406:
405:
404:
403:
402:
401:
397:
393:
389:
384:
381:
377:
367:
366:
365:
364:
363:
360:
357:
352:
348:
344:
340:
336:
335:
334:
331:
327:
323:
319:
315:
306:
302:
298:
296:
292:
288:
283:
279:
274:
270:
266:
262:
259:
257:
253:
249:
246:
242:
238:
234:
230:
226:
223:
222:
221:
220:
217:
215:
211:
207:
203:
193:
189:
186:
183:
179:
175:
171:
168:
165:
162:
159:
156:
153:
150:
147:
143:
140:
139:Find sources:
135:
131:
126:
120:
116:
112:
108:
103:
99:
94:
90:
86:
82:
78:
77:
74:
71:
69:
68:
63:
57:
56:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
769:
766:
761:
743:
735:
710:
692:
671:
659:
658:
639:DinhoGauch10
636:
627:
623:
617:
598:
580:
552:
535:
513:DinhoGauch10
510:
506:
502:
498:
494:
491:
487:
483:
479:
475:
453:
444:
432:
423:
388:DinhoGauch10
385:
382:
378:
374:
361:
358:
355:
342:
339:WP:INHERITED
318:DinhoGauch10
307:
303:
299:
284:
280:
277:
260:
247:
245:front pages.
244:
232:
224:
209:
205:
201:
199:
187:
181:
173:
166:
160:
154:
148:
138:
54:
45:
43:
31:
28:
428:Billie Jean
386:Thank You,
312:—Preceding
287:Billie Jean
164:free images
603:Shadowjams
295:This is it
456:per nom.
291:Motown 25
208:that has
724:contribs
647:contribs
599:Redirect
521:contribs
424:Redirect
396:contribs
326:contribs
314:unsigned
265:Kitfoxxe
237:WP:UNDUE
225:Redirect
125:View log
561:ukexpat
553:Comment
458:ukexpat
435:Pyrrhus
356:Hello,
278:Hello,
170:WP refs
158:scholar
98:protect
93:history
55:Symonds
736:Delete
665:WP:AFC
536:Erpert
454:Delete
343:Erpert
248:Erpert
233:delete
142:Google
102:delete
46:delete
745:Chzz
673:Chzz
185:JSTOR
146:books
119:views
111:watch
107:links
52:Peter
16:<
720:talk
660:Keep
643:talk
607:talk
565:talk
517:talk
462:talk
392:talk
322:talk
269:talk
261:Keep
241:this
231:and
178:FENS
152:news
115:logs
89:talk
85:edit
61:talk
715:KFP
426:to
192:TWL
127:•
123:– (
751:►
722:|
679:►
649:)
645:•
609:)
567:)
534:.
523:)
519:•
464:)
441:16
398:)
394:•
341:.
328:)
324:•
271:)
172:)
117:|
113:|
109:|
105:|
100:|
96:|
91:|
87:|
726:)
718:(
641:(
605:(
563:(
515:(
472:=
460:(
390:(
320:(
267:(
196:)
188:·
182:·
174:·
167:·
161:·
155:·
149:·
144:(
136:(
133:)
121:)
83:(
64:)
58:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.