Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 17:09, 29 May 2012

Michael de la Force

Michael de la Force (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • Stats)

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

Some grandiose claims for notability, but reading between the lines it seems to be clutching at straws. Sources presented and those found so far are either self-published or otherwise primary, unreliable (i.e. IMDB) passing mentions or simply not acceptable as sources (i.e images uploaded to Commons). Some acting roles, mostly minor. Nothing notable in terms of photography, claimed or otherwise. Nothing notable in modelling either. Some impressive journalism (without reliable sources, I couldn't find any either), but is that enough? Яehevkor ✉ 14:22, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. It's a good life, but there's no clear rationale for it meriting an entry here. This doesn't appear to satisfy notability guidelines as an actor, per WP:ENT; similarly, while links are offered to prove that he publishes an online magazine, has photographed famous people, and has himself been a model, there don't appear to be any reliable third party sources which support notability. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 15:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - I can't seem to find any reliable, third party sources that establish notability. The sources all seem to be his first party social media sites, or blog entries about him. Sergecross73 msg me 16:18, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
• Delete The Author would like to delete too. The subject name is a trademark. And there is no reason to damage there business because the career is not notable to your audience. Please delete immediately (68.173.127.108 (talk) 16:55, 25 May 2012 (UTC)) Thank you,
• Comment How does 68, who has claimed to be an independent account, know what the article's author wants? For a group of unconnected users, it's coincidental that this edit followed 68's being blocked by 12 minutes . Trademark? Damage? This looked like a promotional/COI piece from the start. Now let's allow for a consensus from objective editors. 99.153.142.225 (talk) 17:15, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

I am not aware of any restrictions on writing articles on subjects that are trademarked.. Яehevkor ✉ 17:36, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

• Delete - Cannot find reliable source and there are not much significant results from the google. Thus, fails WP:N →TSU  17:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

• Delete – There are notable details, but subject’s biographical details may be better suited for another sort of biographical encyclopedic site.User:archivesharer
  • Reply Perhaps an encyclopedia where there are no laborious restrictions such as those governing reliable sources and gaming with multiple accounts? Note: archivesharer is the subject of a sockpuppet investigation . 99.153.142.225 (talk) 21:19, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
• You obviously do not know all of the reliable sources that exist. I saw several that were noted, and a couple that had been linked. Several of the claims can be very easily confirmed and verified by International government agencies, if one really wanted to know the truth. But, that does not seem to be the goal here. As to your suggestion of several users, I have no knowledge of the other users. But, I assure you they do not work with me. Please don't make up false statements that are provably false. It does not benefit your community any more than it does the world at large. Thanks(Archivesharer (talk) 21:48, 25 May 2012 (UTC))
  • 'Neutral'Unique historical notable journalistic content.209.217.199.72 (talk) 01:18, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment -- Just the beginning of this page is a character assassination in progress. When one considers everything included in the article is 100% accurate and can be 100% confirmed by the sources referenced ( the agencies, the magazines, the television shows, the theatres, the government offices, etc.), the editor calling it grandiose is not in keeping with good international editorial standards. But it seems, because the editors of Misplaced Pages have not made use of the resources to verify the legitimate claims noted, they instead decide to vilify the subject’s career and sling insults. That is unacceptable! The subject did not request to be a part of the Misplaced Pages Foundation, or its project. When the subject sees this and realizes these things are at the top of his search engine results he might consider using the following guides: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/may/09/us-billionaire-wikipedia-defamation

http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/usatoday.html This is an egregious case. especially considering traditional journalists and the major governments of the G8 have already long ago vetted the subject’s career. Many know that what is in the Misplaced Pages article is only part of the career, but what is included is clearly accurate. Additionally, to Matt from York, England (backwards R): for the subject of the article being discussed it was not ever suggested that notability was inherited. In fact, it would be considerably more appropriate to suggest that the successes were achieved by a lot of hard work, beginning when he was about 13 years old. Those successes were achieved by going through many trials, tribulations, blood, sweat, and tears, all the while raising several children and supporting a family. But, for you, Matt of York, England to write that notability cannot be inherited proves a significant lack of knowledge. Your entire country is built on inherited notability!!! Some of the Wikipedians seem to be giving the world their all – some of them should be reconsidered, they are considerably lacking credibility. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archivesharer (talk • contribs) 07:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. It's Rehevkor, not "Matt from York". Although I prefer Matthew if you really want to use my real name. Яehevkor ✉ 09:14, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

• Delete this fluff. I can't make heads or tails of Archivesharer's comments. Drmies (talk) 14:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - Notability not established. At most this person might deserve a mention in another article. Cresix (talk) 15:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
• Delete - unsourced BLP, lots of grandiose claims with no documentation, bizarre tone full of references to something called Leaders Magazine that is unheard of. --Orange Mike | Talk 15:50, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
• Delete per previous comments. Also, the cited sources and claims to notability are as follows:

"LIKE Magazine" (started in 1965) no online mentions found. There is a magazine with a similar name called "theLike magazine" or "Like" magazine but it only has three issues.

New York Millinery Society only had 7 hits in Google, all of which feature the subject of this AfD and simply repeat the one print ad cited in the article.

Ref #1 is to Paper.li - a content curation service. Anyone can sign up to use this service, all you have to do is sign in with your Facebook or Twitter account.

Ref #2 is to IMDb. Per Misplaced Pages:IMDB#IMDb, this is not considered a Misplaced Pages reliable source.

Career claims. At the present time, claims of being a long-running character on As the World Turns are unverifiable, modeling career statements are also unverifiable. Subject being on the staff of LEADERS magazine appears to be unverifiable - in a spot-check of several copies subject is not listed on masthead plus writers of articles were not credited. The first image used to illustrate the article is from the FAPC Theatre Group, which stands for Fifth Avenue Presbyterian Church Theatre Group - I am unsure why this image of this fellowship group is being used to illustrate a Misplaced Pages article about a single member of that group because of my difficulties in verifying the Obie statement. (Also, the copyright of this image seems to be problematic to me. Unless the subject himself took the picture, it was taken by someone else and usually Cast Photographers retain the rights to their images.) I have been unable to verify which year the group won its Obie and what category the Obie was awarded in, the Village Voice Obie Archives for the 2002 Awards has no mentions of "Skin of our Teeth" or of FAPC. (Perhaps the year-awarded is a different year?) Being cast as Elvis Presley in the A&E series is verifiable but per Notability (actors) one main role in a cable or network movie/special does not indicate enough notability for inclusion in WIkipedia. --Shearonink (talk) 16:21, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

• Delete: The subject just plain fails of notability by any standard - WP:GNG, WP:ENTERTAINER. The "Articlesavers" of the world would be better off reviewing the links at WP:PILLAR to gain an understanding as to how Misplaced Pages policies and guidelines work. Ravenswing 16:34, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
  • Comment -- This still does not answer the question of how once can call someone names and debase their career simply because one does not have the ability or desire to verify facts. What are your real world credentials to take such damaging actions? Let's compare your verifiable credentials to those of the subject. ""Reference" LIKE Magazine is not an online publication and has not ever been since it's founding in 1965. ""Reference"" LEADERS Magazine goes directly to a little over 35000 readers worldwide. LEADERS Magazine has traditionally been the most difficult publication in the world to obtain. That is why Wikipedians do not know it. One has to qualify by title to receive the publication. But, if one were to ask any head of state from Margaret Thatcher to Gorbachev, they all know it and have been featured in the pages. Many heads of state have been covered directly by Michael de la Force (see photographs). He was recruited in 1994 (he began two years after high school graduation) to work for LEADERS Magazine. He maintains bona fide Press Credentials with LEADERS Magazine to date. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Archivesharer (talk • contribs) 16:57, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Comment also: you are skating on thin ice, Archivesharer: this isn't exactly a personal attack though it comes pretty close, but your persistent comments, difficult to decipher as they are, are beginning to be disruptive. Whose career, exactly, is Ravenswing debasing? Please consider this a warning: one more such personal comment, here or elsewhere, and you'll be blocked for the duration of this AfD. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 17:09, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Biographical)
• AfD debates