Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Prill (3rd nomination)

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. Although there are a few editors vehemently arguing for this article to stay, their arguments failed to sway a majority of editors !voting delete citing policy-based arguments. Randykitty (talk) 17:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Johnny Prill

Johnny Prill (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)

Vanispamcruftisement. Not notable. Winning one of one years National Grandparents' Day council's songwriting contests is not a major award. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. Gets a little bit of local interest coverage but nothing significant. Scans of personal letters is not coverage in reliable sources.
Note that the so called "National Grandparents' Day website" is his own personal website.
He claims to have the "official" song but who makes it official? The National Grandparents Day Council of Chula Vista, California. Who are they? A self created council with no official authority. What makes what they say official for a public holiday? Nothing. 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. duffbeerforme (talk) 04:10, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 23:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 23:03, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 23:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 23:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 23:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -Fimatic (talk | contribs) 23:04, 14 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz talk 04:30, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (relate) @ 14:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: appears to be an attempt at passing GNG by sheer volume of trivial mentions, non-independent sources, and local sources. 0+0+0=0 Vrac (talk) 20:14, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete: One hell of a self-promoter here, but all those one-sentence mentions? As far as the GNG's concerned, 0+0+0+0+0 still equals zero. The nom's reasoning's pretty good. Nha Trang Allons! 21:33, 5 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.
    1. Weisenbach, Traci L. (2011-08-26). "Prill wins statewide volunteer award". Huron Daily Tribune. Archived from the original on 2015-01-05. Retrieved 2015-01-05.

      The article notes:

    2. Treadwell, Matt (2004-09-10). "Prill's song chosen as official 2004 Grandparents Day anthem". Huron Daily Tribune. Archived from the original on 2015-01-05. Retrieved 2015-01-05.

      The article notes:

    3. "Johnny Prill to host Grandparent's Day concert on Sept. 7". Huron Daily Tribune. 2008-08-21. Archived from the original on 2015-01-05. Retrieved 2015-01-05.

      The article notes:

    4. Unscintillating (talk · contribs) wrote at the previous AfD:
    5. "Prill song on Sturr CD". Huron County View. 2011-09-08. Archived from the original on 2015-01-07. Retrieved 2015-01-07.

      The article notes:

    6. "Prill song on Grammy-nominated CD". Huron County View. 2012-01-19. Archived from the original on 2015-01-07. Retrieved 2015-01-07.

      The article notes:

    7. "Johnny Prill to present free concert for National Grandparents Day". Huron County View. 2010-09-05. Archived from the original on 2015-01-07. Retrieved 2015-01-07.
    8. "Polka CD Reviewed in Detroit Papers". Polish-American Journal. 2005-02-28. Archived from the original on 2015-01-07. Retrieved 2015-01-07 – via HighBeam Research. (subscription required)

      The article notes:

    9. Smyntek, John (2005-01-02). "Bad Axe Polka King Keeps it Fresh". Detroit Free Press.
    10. "Johnny Prill Wins National Songwriter's Award". Polish-American Journal. 2004-10-31. Archived from the original on 2015-01-07. Retrieved 2015-01-07 – via HighBeam Research. (subscription required)
    There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow Johnny Prill to pass Wikipedia:Notability#General notability guideline, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject".

    Cunard (talk) 01:56, 6 January 2015 (UTC) More sources added. Cunard (talk) 04:16, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Huron Daily Tribune articles are very local (County has a population of <35,000) indiscriminate puff pieces. None are significant coverage. The Polish-American Journal "article" is a reproduction of a press release, not independent. The amusing review is trivial. Not enough coverage for WP:GNG. duffbeerforme (talk) 06:53, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Such hyper-local sources tend to be overly indiscriminate about what they publish, as these articles clearly are. They should be dismissed as not significant coverage.

    That one piece discussing "the official song" is another reason this source should be dismissed, a lack of fact checking so not a reliable source. The song is not the official song for the day. Where did they get that info? Straight from Prill? They did not get it from the press release from National Grandparents Council of Chula Vista. They just said the he won their 2004 songwriters award. Did they do any fact checking? duffbeerforme (talk) 07:14, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Detroit Free Press is one source of unknown size.

    They got it from the United States Census website? Bullshit! They did not get it from a source that did not yet exist.

    Articles, such as that Roanoke piece, that source Wikipedia for trivia tidbits are not reliable sources.

    Are there any sources outside Bad Axe that say that before that bit of info, misrepresenting sources used, was spammed into Wikipedia by a SPA promoting Prill? Such as around the time it supposedly happened, back in 2004? Or are they all after May 20112006? duffbeerforme (talk) 07:08, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • They got it from the United States Census website? Bullshit! They did not get it from a source that did not yet exist. – I do not know (nor do you) where they got that information from. But it is evident that they are correct. The United States Census' information confirms they are correct.

    There is no evidence that the Roanoke piece sourced anything from Wikipedia. You are making stuff up.

    Cunard (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Is there a single source of this info from 2004 when it supposedly happened? Is there any mention predating it's introduction into Wikipedia? Is there any mentions that go beyond mentioning this trivia titbit? The 2014 United States Census trivia collection just reproduces that claim, no indication of where that info came from.

    Where does that claim come from? An SPA dedicated to promoting Prill introduced that "fact" unsourced to Wikipedia. No press mentions exist before then. They only started after that time. Lazy journos sourcing from Wikipedia. Another SPA dedicated to promoting Prill re-introduced that "fact" With sources. The sources used, 1 National Grandparents Council press release that does not say that the song is the official song. 2. "Editorial. Happy Grandparents Day!.". The Manila Bulletin Newspaper Online, a paper which quotes directly from this version of a Wikipedia page. "."In 2004, the National Grandparents Day Council of Chula Vista, California announced that "A Song for Grandma and Grandpa’’ by Johnny Prill is the official song of the National Grandparents Day holiday.US Senator Debbie Stabenow told Prill that "it is wonderful that ‘A Song for Grandma And Grandpa’ was chosen as the official song of National Grandparents Day. You have put into words the unique relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren." Lazy Journo copying from Wikipedia but at least they admit it, "Other countries celebrate National Grandparents Day on different dates, the Wikipedia said." Two sources, one does not verify the claim, the other is Wikipedia itself. After that dodgy reintroduction of the claim it again appears in press as a trivia titbit. It's a claim that has been repeatedly removed from Wikipedia but has been reintroduced by SPA promoting Prill but not providing any Valid verification.

    What does The National Grandparents Day Council [1], the organisation that supposedly made this declaration, have to say about Prill and his song? Their press release says nothing about it being the official song of the U.S. National Grandparents Day holiday. It just says it he is "the winner of the the 2004 Grandparents Day National Songwriter's Award." And their website? It says nothing.

    What does Johnny Prill's press release of 23 August 2010 say about the song. "He penned the official National Grandparents Day Song". Is he the source of this claim? duffbeerforme (talk) 03:35, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • I stand corrected on the website. In 2006 a page posted on the National Grandparents Day Council of Chula Vista's website called it the official song of the day. I still stand by my position that this self created corporation maybe saying so does not make it THE official song of National Grandparents Day. The lack the authority. It just makes it the official National Grandparents Day Council's song of National Grandparents Day, not a major thing. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:13, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Relisting comment: Relisted to allow for consideration of sources posted above.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 03:11, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • This source is a 1993 article about Johnny Prill in the Huron Daily Tribune:

    Oglenski, Debbie (1993-09-25). "The family that plays together". Huron Daily Tribune. Retrieved 2015-01-07.

    The article begins:

    Cunard (talk) 04:27, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The subject has in depth reporting from the Detroit Free Press, the Huron Daily Tribune (apparently owned by Hearst Corp), and Huron County View. In terms of reliability, DFP and HDT would seem okay. It is not clear if HCV has a "reputation for fact checking and accuracy" per WP:RS. I haven't been able to access the Diario Las Américas reference, nor the The Manila Bulletin Newspaper Online one. The article minimally meets the requirements of WP:GNG, having significant coverage in multiple (here at least two) reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Assuming good faith with regard to HCV and the inaccessible sources, there may be five reliable sources. It has many references that are to the same repeated sources. But even when regarded as one source, it still passes for notability. Some of the references should absolutely be removed, but the article does not appear to cross the threshold for WP:PROMOTION nor other WP:NOT criteria. Therefore, there is not an appropriate rationale for deletion.  B E C K Y S A Y L E S  03:29, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diario Las Américas reference does not have any depth of coverage of Prill. The Manila Bulletin Newspaper is sourced from Wikipedia. There is no evidence of depth of in depth reporting in Detroit Free Press. That leaves local coverage only. duffbeerforme (talk) 03:41, 14 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • No I don't. I read Diario Las Américas last time it was introduced at afd. Manila is available through Factiva. The article I quoted is their initial piece on the day (September 12, 2009) The followup editorial (used as a source) repeats much of that piece without providing attribution. duffbeerforme (talk) 16:47, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have asked the nominator of the 2nd afd for clarification. What does he remember about the coverage from Detroit press? duffbeerforme (talk) 16:56, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete The coverage linked above is mostly from a very local paper with limited coverage, and does not pass the threshold. The only other sources are press releases that also fail to mention him entirely, or only mention him in passing. I don't remember much of the Detroit Free Press coverage, and they don't have an archive, but I remember it being only one-sentence mentions here and there, and maybe one review at best. The only other coverage I remember is a single paragraph in Country Weekly that said nothing more than the fact that he name-dropped Alan Jackson in a song. The only hits on Google Books are one-sentence mentions of his "Grandparents" song or false positives. Overall, there are only 327 unique hits for his name on Google. It is clear that he is not notable outside a small hub in the Thumb of Michigan if at all. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 17:15, 17 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete I rarely !vote on a popular music AfD, but this seems a very clear case of hype and making a big deal out of minor accomplishments. I suspect news stories of the type presented here to be very much influenced by PR, and local coverage of local artists and writers is not usually considered sufficiently discriminating here for the purposes of notability. DGG ( talk ) 16:25, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep He created a song that is now "the official song of the U.S. National Grandparents Day holiday". He gets ample coverage for this and not just in America. In the Filipino newspaper Manila Bulletin, he gets coverage, and it says US Senator Debbie Stabenow told Prill that "it is wonderful that "A Song for Grandma And Grandpa" was chosen as the official song of National Grandparents Day. You have put into words the unique relationship between grandparents and their grandchildren." [2] Highbeam list various other newspapers covering him. [3] If your work receives that much attention, then you are a notable artist. Dream Focus 23:56, 18 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Dream Focus: I wasn't aware that creating a song for a non-notable holiday made you notable. Also, the sources you're linking are about the holiday or grandparents in general, with Prill only being mentioned in passing. I also wasn't aware that being passingly name-dropped was the same as significant coverage. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 09:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The American government has declared it an official national holiday. It is celebrated in other nations as well. So how is it you decided its a "non-notable holiday"? And he clearly passes WP:CREATIVE #3 "The person has created ... a significant or well-known work ... that has been the subject of ... multiple independent periodical articles or reviews." Dream Focus 11:58, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Dream Focus: Again, he is not the primary subject of the sources. The holiday is. The sources only mention him very, very, very passingly. He's literally one sentence in an article about something else entirely. I was mentioned in an article on a local shopping mall; does that make me notable? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:14, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Dream Focus: Are you intentionally ignoring the "passing mention" part? He is not the subject of the sources. The holiday is, with him only mentioned in passing. How much clearer can I make this before you finally see it? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • His work has not been the subject of multiple newspapers, just a few passing mentions as an item of trivia. His work (no sign of it being popular) is not THE official song of the day (extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence). duffbeerforme (talk) 03:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "his work" I was referring to that song that was being discussed.

    That council don't get to pick the official song for a US Government holiday. The US government that made it an official US holiday gets to do that, not a little self created corporation.

    It is an extraordinary claim that that horrid little song is the official song for a US holiday. We have very ordinary evidence for this claim. Mentioned in passing as an item of trivia. Mentioned in passing by a self created corporation. That page on their website looks more like they are hosting an advert for Prill than anything written by them. duffbeerforme (talk) 07:15, 20 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete - Coverage of the subject seems to be mostly limited to local publications and I don't personally agree that creating "the official song of the U.S. National Grandparents Day holiday" is a credible indication of notability per WP:MUSICBIO. He appears to be somewhat locally notable but no more than that—note that link is to a failed proposal. Locally notable ≠ notable. Bellerophon talk to me 18:44, 19 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, that's why I said "mostly limited to...". Unless I have missed something, and I am known to make mistakes, it's still the only non-local source that lends significant coverage. Which is not in my opinion sufficient. I commend your efforts to find sources Cunard, and your arguments have swayed me previously. But not on this occasion. Bellerophon talk to me 23:01, 19 January 2015 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Johnny_Prill_(3rd_nomination)&oldid=1220478307"
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnny Prill (3rd nomination), released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.