930:. I mentioned three pictures, two of the three IMO clearly show attention being given directly to Prill, which as per the nutshell of WP:N goes to notability. Each non-trivial source contributes to wp:notability, some more than others. We have singers; politicians; four different newspapers in Huron, Detroit, and Las Vegas; an independent council in California; a foreign language article; the list goes on. As per the nutshell of WP:N, the "world-at-large" has given Prill "sufficiently significant attention". Even if you argue against "sufficiently", you still have no theoretical case for deletion, so none of the delete !votes are making policy-based arguments. As per recent analysis such non-policy delete !votes might be rehabilitated with partial weight as "redirect or merge somewhere" !votes. But if there are no editors arguing for redirect or merge, there is no place to assign these !votes but with the "keep" !votes. This is the point at which a closing administrator may restore the standing of the delete !votes to declare that there was no consensus at the AfD, but this type of close encourages the cycle of unnecessary AfD nominations and non-policy-based Delete !votes to continue. There are other possibilities, but the best long-term result for the community here is a close as "Keep".
245:. The article is very promotional in tone. All of the sources are local coverage from the Bad Axe paper, self-promoting quotes from others on the National Grandparents' Day website, or trivial (a two-sentence review on his single, a couple brief blurbs in the Detroit Free Press — "Disc of the week" is definitely trivial). A search on Google News found nothing that wasn't from the Bad Axe paper, and Google Books gave nothing. This article has a lot of words, but says very little about what makes Prill notable. Having a lot of famous people give you lip service is not notability. Even his official song for Grandparents' Day is barely an assertation, as I can't find any
620:
worldwide on the www. As for the
Stabenow reference, it is a picture of a letter from a senator. It is either reliable or it is a forgery. Is somebody that has attracted attention for volunteering in nursing homes and has attracted attention from politicians, writers, and musicians for promoting grandparents, going to resort to a forgery that is easily tested by writing to the Senator's office? I think not. I also note that the previous post has overlooked an international source I provided on 31 July in my previous post. WP:GNG only requires two "good" articles to establish wp:notability, a benchmark which is surpassed here.
480:
claims to have the "official" song but who makes it official? the
National Grandparents Day Council of Chula Vista, California. Who are they? What makes what they say official for a public holiday? Was the song official for only the year in which he won the contest then official goes on to the next winner? We don't know cause it's a minor contest reliable sources don't seem to be covering and the only info we are getting is coming from Prill himself. This article should be deleted and this self serving spam removed from other locations.
455:. All they did was pimp him out. They are not reviewers. Every argument you've made so far is "He's notable because he has a tangential tie to another notable thing", "What about X?", and your "already covered elsewhere"/"has reliable sourcing" comment is immaterial. This has nothing to do with National Grandparents Day's notability; it has to do with
433:. IMO the attention given to Prill by Stabenow and Seeger contributes to wp:notability. The Carter picture, comment, and signature is interesting; it doesn't in prose show that Carter knew anything about Prill except his first name; yet attention goes from the former president to Prill's connection to National Grandparent's Day.
756:
He is not a prominent part of the day. There may be an argument that he is a prominent part of the story of the self created council, but I don't consider that to be so. But not of the day. The song might be the official song of the council as mentioned in your link to the story about the council but
479:
It is not reliably sourced, the so called "National
Grandparents' Day website" is Prill's own personal website, not an independent reliable source. The only reason that this info exists here in three different places is because one person decided to spam the same cruft into three different places. He
720:
part of this story. As such there is no case for deletion of the redirect. Nor is there any case being made for deleting the edit history (the promotional tone can be fixed with ordinary editing). If there is no case to delete the redirect, and no case to delete the edit history, there is no case
898:
Comment: Dear Sir, username "duffbeer: makes a good point, the mention in the sources are topical. The "review" you listed (second source) is merely a capsule. I do understand you are invested in preserving this article, but I don't see him as a lynchpin of the day. From your argument, it would see
1067:
is a capsule. Not extensive coverage. Merely passing mention. Despite the multitude of "sources" listed, not one confirms notability. And, for the record, Sir, I do see "duffbeer" as having a point here. The impetus of this article was to promote this subject, and this "day" and unfortunately this
1040:
On the minus side, about 10 of the "references" are
NationalGrandparentsDay.com which is his OWN web site. On the plus side, regarding real-world notability, if the claims are true, some major folks have recorded songs written by him and has received some reviews. Also there are 4 sources which
925:
WP:DUE is a policy that says prominence is determined by sources, duff is using a definition of prominence that bases prominence on his/her personal opinion. As per the text at the start of every AfD edit, "All input is welcome, though valid arguments citing relevant guidelines will be given more
424:
Passes WP:GNG. This is a topic that is already covered elsewhere in the encyclopedia and has reliable sourcing. Thus there is no case here for deletion of the redirect, and no case is being made that there is objectionable material in the edit history that requires deletion. I agree that the
704:"world-at-large". I think it is reasonable to believe that Prill posted the two pictures. I see nothing wrong with a source providing evidence of wp:notability, it makes our job as editors easier when sources provide such. The promotional tone is a different problem, promotional tone is a
619:
is an example of an article sourced with two "local" sources; where one book had an ISBN not listed at
Worldcat; and about the other book an editor posted, "To the best of my knowledge the book was merely printed locally, not published.". The newspaper in the current discussion is available
703:
picture could have been routinely obtained, and therefore shows no wp:notability, but I don't see how the
Stabenow and Seeger pictures can exist without the politician and the singer directly attending to Prill, i.e., the pictures reliably show that Prill is "attracting attention" from the
660:. That is, I don't care if Bobo Smith has an article and his sources haven't been updated at all since his proud grandmother created it. All I care about, Sir, is if this guy has some independent, verfiable sources. And it has come to my attention that this "www.nationalgrandparentsday" is
406:
Gets a little bit of local interest coverage but nothing significant. Note that the so called "National
Grandparents' Day website" is his own personal website. Winning one of one years National Grandparents' Day council's songwriting is not a major a major award.
944:
I am not basing it on my opionon of prominece. I'm basing it on what independent reliable sources have written, or rather in this case not written. If the pictures you are refering to are the ones on his site then they are not independent reliable sources.
634:
Do you really think the
Governor kissing your ass = notability? No. That's called riding coattails. Also, the availability of the sources is immaterial to notability. Whether they're only available locally or online has no bearing on notability.
757:
that gives it no other status. The passing mention in that article is trivial coverage. The. Ouncil itself gets hardly any coverage And prill is only a trivial part of that so to leap to call him a prominent part of a related story is wrong.
586:: The promotional tone of this article makes it suspect, but the bottom line is this guy is not notable enough. The bulk of the sources are gleaned from "nationalgrandparentsday.com" a place I don't think is verifiable enough. Interestingly,
695:
I was aware of the concern represented by the copyright on the grandparents website when I stated, "IMO the attention given to Prill by
Stabenow and Seeger contributes to wp:notability." There is an argument to be made that the
1041:
appear wp:notability-suitable. Two are too hard for anyone to quickly check (old and off-line) and two are on-line and look suitable. The wording style is not too promotional, but the choice of material to cover is.
188:
378:
Did you miss the part about "All of the sources are local coverage from the Bad Axe paper"? You can't build an article entirely on local sources. I've been in the Oscoda paper several times; does that make
668:
even valid. And the bulk of the references link to this promotional site. As for the picture, again, it is great for Bobo to have a picture of him, say, shaking hands with Bill
Clinton. But while Clinton
88:
83:
220:
503:"The National Council of Grandparents Day (National Grandparents Day Council) is a nonprofit corporation established by descendants of Marian M. McQuade, founder of National Grandparents Day."
504:
143:
1111:
a straight-foward layout of what is independent, and what isn't. What we have for Prill isn't much in the way of the former. One of the many reasons this guy is not notable.
616:
182:
148:
78:
775:
But WP:DUE prominence is defined not by Knowledge (XXG) editors but by reliable sources. And trivial coverage is something like a listing in a phone book.
722:
Further, a variety of secondary sources in the article, and more found for this AfD, support the position that WP:GNG and WP:N are satisfied.
1088:
Not necessarily disagreeing with you overall, but where did you hear "local newspapers are not considered "independent" by Knowledge (XXG)."?
828:
is an amusing music review in the lasvegasmercury that is comparable to the review already cited in the article from the Las Vegas Weekly.
1026:
994:
319:
See 'if the nominator clearly expresses your opinion on the matter, making you parrot their statement instead of just saying 'per nom' is
927:
52:. Although the case for notability is weak here, I don't think it's weak enough for me to disregard the arguments of the keep voters.
17:
403:
1068:
makes the notability factor a hard sell. The lack of independent sources and appropriate coverage just seal the deal for a delete.
594:
guy's. The other sources are local newspapers. Nothing substantial, national or distinguished. That's not enough for him to pass
356:
116:
111:
359:
353:
1120:
1099:
1077:
1052:
1032:
1000:
954:
939:
916:
887:
871:
853:
837:
802:
784:
766:
747:
731:
686:
642:
629:
607:
574:
540:
516:
489:
470:
442:
416:
390:
369:
334:
310:
289:
272:
256:
234:
120:
61:
203:
103:
170:
1143:
40:
1060:: In terms of the "sources" listed, I agree the bulk of them listed are from his own website. By default I consider
926:
weight than unsupported statements". Being a linchpin is not what WP:N is about, see the lead of WP:N. See also
935:
867:
833:
780:
727:
713:
625:
512:
438:
430:
452:
1021:
989:
328:
164:
1116:
1073:
950:
912:
883:
798:
762:
743:
682:
603:
485:
412:
657:
825:
160:
1139:
1064:
promotional! Moreover, local newspapers are not considered "independent" by Knowledge (XXG). Also, this
364:
305:
231:
57:
36:
876:
299:
107:
931:
863:
829:
776:
723:
621:
508:
434:
320:
210:
1095:
1048:
1016:
1013:
984:
981:
324:
196:
970:
552:
526:
99:
67:
1112:
1069:
946:
908:
879:
794:
758:
739:
678:
599:
481:
408:
285:
349:
242:
1065:
570:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1138:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
224:
53:
900:
717:
674:
595:
176:
824:
is a Highbeam preview of a 2004 article about Prill in the Polish-American Journal and
738:
Comment: Dear Sir, please see comments above in regards to photo by "ten pound hammer."
537:
281:
1109:
904:
563:
137:
821:
352:
per the following reliable secondary sources (they were found in the article):
973:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
899:
Prill is. But indeed, Prill is a pawn. The picture you mentioned doesn't fit
555:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
529:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
656:
First of all, for someone who is quite active on AfD, you should know about
265:
The article was successfully deleted in 2009, and was re-created in 2011.
712:
of Knowledge (XXG) articles. To run through the main points again, the
793:
Reliable sources have not given him prominence, just passing mentions.
673:
notable, Bobo is not. Same applies to Mr. Prill, who does not pass
451:
You really think having famous people kiss your ass = notability?
1132:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
459:
notability. Just because the holiday is notable, doesn't mean
708:
issue. wp:notability as per WP:N is not a function of the
590:
article on WP was/is edited by the same person who created
425:
article has promotional tone, but so too does the article
221:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
426:
133:
129:
125:
1012:: To give more time to comment on the new sources. --
507:. The article also gives attention to Johnny Prill.
501:
The National Grandparents Day Council, "Who are they?"
195:
716:
is nationally recognized by congress, and Prill is a
617:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Michael Muldoon
980:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
562:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
536:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
209:
89:
Articles for deletion/Johnny Prill (3rd nomination)
84:
Articles for deletion/Johnny Prill (2nd nomination)
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1146:). No further edits should be made to this page.
846:First one still looks like run of the mill PR.
8:
219:Note: This debate has been included in the
218:
76:
664:site. So not a source that is strong,
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
74:
862:{ec} Please state your evidence.
79:Articles for deletion/Johnny Prill
24:
907:argument in previous comments.
721:for deletion<full stop: -->
1:
1121:02:16, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
1100:17:56, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
1078:16:05, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
1053:12:17, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
1033:09:30, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
1001:09:29, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
955:11:33, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
940:01:54, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
917:00:48, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
888:11:29, 20 August 2012 (UTC)
872:00:57, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
854:20:22, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
838:02:39, 14 August 2012 (UTC)
803:05:52, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
785:01:33, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
767:01:20, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
62:16:44, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
1163:
748:23:27, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
732:01:41, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
687:00:00, 9 August 2012 (UTC)
643:23:11, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
630:23:03, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
608:16:55, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
575:04:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)
541:15:45, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
335:00:48, 1 August 2012 (UTC)
928:WP:Redirects for deletion
714:National Grandparents Day
517:20:39, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
490:07:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
471:04:41, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
443:03:57, 31 July 2012 (UTC)
417:08:03, 30 July 2012 (UTC)
391:17:06, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
370:09:31, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
311:09:34, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
290:04:53, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
273:18:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
257:18:57, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
235:19:20, 24 July 2012 (UTC)
1135:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
249:sources to verify it.
73:AfDs for this article:
348:- This person passes
404:Vanispamcruftisement
321:needless bureaucracy
1108:Well, there's this
48:The result was
1010:Relisting comment
1003:
577:
543:
368:
309:
237:
1154:
1137:
1093:
1046:
1029:
1024:
1019:
997:
992:
987:
979:
975:
851:
849:Ten Pound Hammer
640:
638:Ten Pound Hammer
567:
561:
557:
535:
531:
468:
466:Ten Pound Hammer
388:
386:Ten Pound Hammer
367:
365:Northamerica1000
362:
346:Keep and cleanup
331:
308:
306:Northamerica1000
303:
280:per nominator --
270:
268:Ten Pound Hammer
254:
252:Ten Pound Hammer
228:
214:
213:
199:
151:
141:
123:
34:
1162:
1161:
1157:
1156:
1155:
1153:
1152:
1151:
1150:
1144:deletion review
1133:
1089:
1042:
1027:
1022:
1017:
995:
990:
985:
968:
932:Unscintillating
864:Unscintillating
847:
830:Unscintillating
777:Unscintillating
724:Unscintillating
702:
636:
622:Unscintillating
598:no way, no how.
565:
550:
524:
509:Unscintillating
464:
453:WP:NOTINHERITED
435:Unscintillating
384:
363:
333:
329:
304:
266:
250:
226:
156:
147:
114:
98:
95:
93:
71:
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1160:
1158:
1149:
1148:
1129:
1128:
1127:
1126:
1125:
1124:
1123:
1103:
1102:
1081:
1080:
1055:
1035:
1006:
1005:
1004:
977:
976:
965:
964:
963:
962:
961:
960:
959:
958:
957:
920:
919:
895:
894:
893:
892:
891:
890:
857:
856:
841:
840:
818:
817:
816:
815:
814:
813:
812:
811:
810:
809:
808:
807:
806:
805:
788:
787:
770:
769:
751:
750:
700:
690:
689:
650:
649:
648:
647:
646:
645:
611:
610:
580:
579:
578:
559:
558:
547:
546:
545:
544:
533:
532:
521:
520:
519:
497:
496:
495:
494:
493:
492:
474:
473:
446:
445:
419:
396:
395:
394:
393:
373:
372:
342:
341:
340:
339:
338:
337:
327:
325:The Bushranger
314:
313:
293:
292:
275:
241:Seems to fail
239:
238:
216:
153:
94:
92:
91:
86:
81:
75:
72:
70:
65:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1159:
1147:
1145:
1141:
1136:
1130:
1122:
1118:
1114:
1113:Jimsteele9999
1110:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1101:
1097:
1092:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1079:
1075:
1071:
1070:Jimsteele9999
1066:
1063:
1059:
1056:
1054:
1050:
1045:
1039:
1036:
1034:
1030:
1025:
1020:
1015:
1011:
1008:
1007:
1002:
998:
993:
988:
983:
978:
974:
972:
967:
966:
956:
952:
948:
947:duffbeerforme
943:
942:
941:
937:
933:
929:
924:
923:
922:
921:
918:
914:
910:
909:Jimsteele9999
906:
902:
897:
896:
889:
885:
881:
880:duffbeerforme
877:
875:
874:
873:
869:
865:
861:
860:
859:
858:
855:
850:
845:
844:
843:
842:
839:
835:
831:
827:
823:
820:
819:
804:
800:
796:
795:duffbeerforme
792:
791:
790:
789:
786:
782:
778:
774:
773:
772:
771:
768:
764:
760:
759:duffbeerforme
755:
754:
753:
752:
749:
745:
741:
740:Jimsteele9999
737:
736:
735:
734:
733:
729:
725:
719:
715:
711:
707:
699:
694:
693:
692:
691:
688:
684:
680:
679:Jimsteele9999
676:
672:
667:
663:
659:
658:WP:OTHERSTUFF
655:
652:
651:
644:
639:
633:
632:
631:
627:
623:
618:
615:
614:
613:
612:
609:
605:
601:
600:Jimsteele9999
597:
593:
589:
585:
582:
581:
576:
573:
572:
569:
568:
560:
556:
554:
549:
548:
542:
539:
534:
530:
528:
523:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
499:
498:
491:
487:
483:
482:duffbeerforme
478:
477:
476:
475:
472:
467:
462:
458:
454:
450:
449:
448:
447:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
423:
420:
418:
414:
410:
409:duffbeerforme
405:
401:
398:
397:
392:
387:
382:
377:
376:
375:
374:
371:
366:
360:
357:
354:
351:
347:
344:
343:
336:
332:
330:One ping only
326:
322:
318:
317:
316:
315:
312:
307:
301:
297:
296:
295:
294:
291:
287:
283:
279:
276:
274:
269:
264:
261:
260:
259:
258:
253:
248:
244:
236:
233:
230:
229:
222:
217:
212:
208:
205:
202:
198:
194:
190:
187:
184:
181:
178:
175:
172:
169:
166:
162:
159:
158:Find sources:
154:
150:
145:
139:
135:
131:
127:
122:
118:
113:
109:
105:
101:
97:
96:
90:
87:
85:
82:
80:
77:
69:
66:
64:
63:
59:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
1134:
1131:
1090:
1061:
1057:
1043:
1037:
1009:
969:
905:Bill Clinton
848:
709:
705:
697:
670:
665:
661:
653:
637:
591:
587:
583:
571:
564:
551:
525:
500:
465:
460:
456:
421:
399:
385:
380:
345:
277:
267:
262:
251:
246:
240:
225:
206:
200:
192:
185:
179:
173:
167:
157:
100:Johnny Prill
68:Johnny Prill
50:no consensus
49:
47:
31:
28:
300:WP:NOTAVOTE
183:free images
54:Mark Arsten
1140:talk page
1091:North8000
1044:North8000
1038:Weak keep
718:prominent
383:notable?
247:secondary
37:talk page
1142:or in a
971:Relisted
553:Relisted
538:ItsZippy
527:Relisted
350:WP:BASIC
282:Artene50
243:WP:MUSIC
144:View log
39:or in a
1058:Comment
1014:King of
982:King of
903:per my
710:content
706:content
698:Clinton
654:Comment
566:Wifione
189:WP refs
177:scholar
117:protect
112:history
901:WP:GNG
701:Carter
675:WP:GNG
596:WP:GNG
584:Delete
400:Delete
278:Delete
161:Google
121:delete
323:'. -
232:Smith
227:Cliff
204:JSTOR
165:books
149:Stats
138:views
130:watch
126:links
16:<
1117:talk
1096:talk
1074:talk
1062:this
1049:talk
951:talk
936:talk
913:talk
884:talk
868:talk
834:talk
826:here
822:Here
799:talk
781:talk
763:talk
744:talk
728:talk
683:talk
626:talk
604:talk
592:this
588:that
513:talk
486:talk
463:is.
439:talk
431:here
429:and
427:here
422:Keep
413:talk
298:See
286:talk
263:Note
197:FENS
171:news
134:logs
108:talk
104:edit
58:talk
852:•
662:his
641:•
505:ref
469:•
457:his
389:•
271:•
255:•
211:TWL
146:•
142:– (
1119:)
1098:)
1076:)
1051:)
1031:♠
999:♠
953:)
938:)
915:)
886:)
878:.
870:)
836:)
801:)
783:)
765:)
746:)
730:)
685:)
671:is
666:if
628:)
606:)
515:)
488:)
461:he
441:)
415:)
402:.
381:me
361:.
358:,
355:,
302:.
288:)
223:.
191:)
136:|
132:|
128:|
124:|
119:|
115:|
110:|
106:|
60:)
1115:(
1094:(
1072:(
1047:(
1028:♣
1023:♦
1018:♥
996:♣
991:♦
986:♥
949:(
934:(
911:(
882:(
866:(
832:(
797:(
779:(
761:(
742:(
726:(
681:(
677:.
624:(
602:(
511:(
484:(
437:(
411:(
284:(
215:)
207:·
201:·
193:·
186:·
180:·
174:·
168:·
163:(
155:(
152:)
140:)
102:(
56:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.