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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 09:00, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Javier ideami[edit]

Javier ideami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Weak delete. I had originally written a much longer writeup on this, but since Javier wrote on this page before I had finished I lost all my work, so I'll make it quick(er). As stated by Ideami below, he wrote an article about himself although in his defense maybe he wasn't aware of the rules. I don't know. Either way, looking through Google (and I admit I am not well-versed in this subject) Although there a quite a few Google links that reference him, it was hard to say how many were reliable third party links or ones that were affiliated with the subject. Either way, maybe a neutral third party (I.E. not some newly registered user whose sole edit count is for Ideami) can assess as to whether or not he's notable.

I'm also nominating Ideami studios for deletion. Notability is hard to assess as well as there's only 15 hits on Google.

Ideami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) CyberGhostface (talk) 01:52, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm withdrawing my deletion nom. I admit now that I was overzealous in nominating it for deletion, because the main reason was of the possible COI which in this case was mistaken because there was an already existing article on the subject's operations. After seeing dozens of no-notability celebs trying to start their own page, I have become suspicious in a lot of cases and I am more prone in jumping the gun but I think in this one I acted too soon. At the very least, no one's been responding to any of Ideami's arguments, so I don't think it would be fair of me to keep this going.--CyberGhostface (talk) 12:21, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dear Editor, if you are referring to 15 google links to www.ideami.com, lets please write the information complete, if you go to http://tools.marketleap.com/publinkpop for example, indeed there are 13 google links to my web but there are also 325 Yahoo links to my web, so to be fair maybe it would be fair to say that there are 13 google and 325 yahoo links to my web? apart from that there are hundreds of references in google about me and my work searching for ideami, javier ideami, or javier gonzalez bernardo. Direct links to the website indexed by google are not very relevant because i never , repeat, never update my metatags and keywords and therefore my website is being very poorly indexed by google; what is very relevant is that searching for ideami, javier ideami or javier gonzalez bernardo you get hundreds of references from valid sources unconnected to me and it would be fair that you stated that; so im just asking for fairness, its not fair to say that there are 15 google links, you have to explain that those are links to my website just of google (there are 325 of yahoo which indexes in a different way!) and they are dependent only on search indexing and my website promotion efforts are Zero, so you have to add that there are 325 Yahoo links to my website, because i guess Yahoo is also relevant, isnt it? , apart from that what is truly relevant here i repeat is that searching for me in google gives tons of results that state that im a notable artist , results from sources that are not be connected to me, thank you for your attention and im just trying to help and contribute as much as i can , and to explain all you want me to explain thanks for your attention Ideami (talk) 12:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

hi this is Javier Ideami, i just wanted to explain why i created the page; I did it because i was told by an architecture and design group unconnected to me that a page about Ideami studios which i founded was soon going to be created, i guess i should have left the same people write a page about my work if they wanted, instead of doing it myself, so i acknowledge that was probably a mistake, well, we could maybe delete this page and the same people that are creating the Ideami page could create the page about me, thats a possibility, i certainly welcome the discussion and if you need any information i am here to answer any questions Ideami (talk) 01:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

I really wish you had waited until I finished my original discussion. Now I have to start all over again.--CyberGhostface (talk) 01:46, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry about that, let me know what you think, im going to sleep in a minute but i will be back in the morning in a few hours Ideami (talk) 01:54, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

It's alright, it happens a lot on Wikipedia. I should have been quicker anyway. Anyway, if this can be proven to be notable I won't object.--CyberGhostface (talk) 02:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

hi and thank you for your comment, i would like to say that yes if you search in google for Ideami or Javier Ideami or Javier Gonzalez Bernardo which is my birth´s name before i changed it to Javier Ideami, you will find many many references, and most of them , coming from the London Academy of Media, Film & TV, the Spiegel Magazine in Germany, The university of Rome, The Laboral Museum of Art and Technology in Spain , different newspapers etc etc etc , can obviously not be affiliated with me, i am very tranquil about this , anybody who does a serious research around the web about me will be able to check this, i already wrote a few links in the references of the article as a beginning ; yes for sure i should have left others to create the page instead of doing it myself , that was a mistake, but as for the notability of my work there is good feedback about that around the web no doubts, thank you for your comment again Ideami (talk) 02:01, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

I entered Javier Ideami in Google and received 1,670 results, even with the first 100 being fully relevent on quick scan. It is possible that such a rapid putdown of genuine articles appears to be unfair. Regarding notability there are many references available from several sources even in the first 100 Google hits. I think there are two issues here, one is the fact that the subject entered primary data in ignorance of the policy for which a sincere apology has been offered in good faith. The second of notability can be satisfied in the first instance by a review of Googled articles. For further evidence generated by evolution of the wikipage I think a reasonable suggestion would be to allow time for its development on this subject of a notable artist and his work. In context of a genuine policy misunderstanding, better to advise than to penalise. Regards Callycrane (talk) 02:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)— Callycrane (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

At this point I really don't know what to say but...A.) If Ideami is notable (and he may very well be), him writing an autobiography isn't going to affect it being kept or not and B.) Having a single-purpose account (all of your edits thus far about Ideami) really isn't going to help matters much.--CyberGhostface (talk) 02:59, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise that my comments relate to this issue. One has to start somewhere. I'm sure you'll make the appropriate and balanced decision. Regards Callycrane (talk) 03:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the one making the consensus.--CyberGhostface (talk) 11:32, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I consider Javier ideami a notable artist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ArturoVittori (talk • contribs) 04:57, 11 September 2008 (UTC) — ArturoVittori (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

And yet another new user, this one whose sole edit is this page.--CyberGhostface (talk) 11:29, 11 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

sorry but i cant control who writes what online, i certainly would ask people who join wikipedia for the first time not to write anything in my favour here as editors are simply not going to take that into account, its clear that only people who have been for a long time in wikipedia should write here, i have understood this; i add here yet more links from news sources/institutions that are obviously not affiliated with me and which clearly state that im a notable artist, in the first one itself i appear alongside other professionals who are in wikipedia (such as Eric and Brian deacon, Peter Purves, Sally Gray and others), i wrote from the beginning lots more in the references area of the article and i could keep adding more and more, i think there are enough totally unconnected sources to me online that state that im a notable artist, if you decide to delete the article no problems go ahead, i am not going to fight this forever, but i can assure you that if i wasnt being told every few days that im a notable artist i wouldnt have put myself into this mess in the first place, i totally agree that only notable artists should appear in wikipedia, i couldnt agree more, therefore whatever you decide i respect it

thank you for your attention, Ideami (talk) 11:56, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

user arturovittori is indeed Arturo Vittori , who is in wikipedia , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arturo_Vittori , he is a notable artist and architect and he considers me a notable artist, he certainly tried to help because he does consider me a notable artist and i thank him, obviously he came here to say that and you wont take it into account because he created a new user to do that, i understand , its no problem, i just wanted to say , he is indeed a strong reference, and you can contact him and ask him about me anytime , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arturo_Vittori

Ideami (talk) 12:04, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

Twenty bucks says that's a load of bollocks. PhishRCool Talk / Contribs / Secret Page 00:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Hi, I subscribed wikipedia 9-10 months ago, but I am a good google user since a longer period. Actually, I know Javier, he is a good artist indeed etc., but besides that I cannot see why this page should be deleted. Ok, he admitted he did a mistake in starting it, but informations given are essential and refer to his real artistic work. It is not my intention to criticize google's policy, not at all, but I can tell from my experience there are excellent living artists and authors about whom you still find not so much through web research (google links). So, maybe, some editing with the help of the administrator could be enough to keep this wiki page on, according to google's policy. I am writing the same also for Ideami studio's page Maddamura (talk) 12:34, 11 September 2008 (UTC)Maddamura[reply]

Delete per WP:AUTOBIO and WP:SOAP. PhishRCool Talk / Contribs / Secret Page 00:58, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Let's take a look:

Is it coincidence that all of these users, all of whom have only been in existence within the last 3 days, have virtually editted only pages related to Javier Ideami or Arturo Vittori? I think not. Also, I think it is clear from the last contributions page that Maddamura has not been around for 9-10 months as they claim; nor do I think that it is coincidence that Maddamura just so happens to be the one who created the page on Arturo Vittori. There's definitely something fishy going on here, I think it can be best described as sock puppetry. 70.19.191.130 (talk) 01:47, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think you should assume good faith. The most I suspected was that Arturo Vittori was friends with Javier Ideami.--CyberGhostface (talk) 02:15, 12 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank you, is this the supposed to exist - good faith - of wikipedia editors?? im insulted by the comments of PhishRCool, i surely respect him , he is an editor of wikipedia which for me is a very important position, but he is utterly wrong; those 3 users are Three different persons, the three know my work and the three think im a notable artist, is it so rare that they decide to come to the discussion and say so???? one of them has indeed been in wikipedia 10 months, maddalena, the other two had never been users and of course they had to create a user to come here; one of those is Arturo Vittori and yes there is an article in wikipedia about him, , and what? isnt it important that a person that has an article in wikipedia comes and says that yes im a notable artist? i thought that was what i was supposed to bring to the discussion, evidence of notability; there is no good faith here, there is negativism and nothing else; i do not need those 3 users; I repeat for the last time, go to Google and search for Ideami, Javier Ideami , and Javier Gonzalez Bernardo , you will get hundreds of results linked to me, many many of them from completely unconnected sources to me and many stating that im a notable artist, for gods sake isnt that enough??? i do not need the help of any of those 3 users who wrote things, the evidence is there in google for all of you to see, for gods sake is it so difficult that you go and check it out there? how on earth can i be affiliated or linked with the spiegel magazine, the london academy, the laboral museum of modern art, the exibart most important art newspaper in italy, the dozens of art newspapers announcing my exhibits that appear in google, the dozens of news pages that say that renown photographer and artist javier etc etc , the film festival pages that talk about my international festival prize etc etc etc , go ahead and delete the page if you like, it doesnt matter next month or next year or whenever somebody else is going to create a page about ideami because he is a notable artist already and more so every month and every year and certainly next time if this happens again i will not be here in this discussion, seeing the attitude of most wikipedia editors is simple absurd to be in these discussions, i have only seen one person here that i can consider a true and fair wikipedia editor, which is CyberGhostface , he could propose to delete my page but in his comments you can see thinking, reasoning and at least effort to consider pros and cons and to reach a conclussion, which is absolutely absent from the rest of opinions written here, thanks very much Ideami (talk) 10:32, 12 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[reply]

dear all, as the subject of the page i would like to request that a final decision is taken please as soon as possible, as having the page in this state is no good for me really; so whatever decision is taken, deleting or keeping, lets take it please, thanks so much Ideami (talk) 20:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)Javier Ideami[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.
More