Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Cote (film director)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Discounting the SPAs, socks, meatpuppets, etc., there is a pretty clear consensus to delete. PeterSymonds (talk) 13:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Cote (film director)[edit]

David Cote (film director) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an article for a filmmaker whose notability is extremely questionable and based on very thin sources:

  • The only claim to notability for any of the filmmaker's movies is that one of them was "accepted into the Cannes Film Festival's Short Film Corner". The criteria for acceptance into the Short Film Corner are minimal; this is more a matter of registration than a critical evaluation.
  • Few of the sources provide any real content, and those that do are principally derived from self-authored blurbs -- they cannot really be considered reliable sources.
  • The article was authored by Nick Soroka, who worked as a unit manager on Cote's first film. The article was originally submitted under user Davecoteproductions and then as Finelineproductions. It has all the hallmarks of being a promotional biography commissioned by Dave Cote.

This filmmaker may become notable at some point, but there just do not appear to be enough sources to support it now. Tim Pierce (talk) 03:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete as nominator. Tim Pierce (talk) 19:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • See below, many sources have been added, WP:CREATIVE has been satisfied, as well as NOTABILITY.

NickSoroka (talk) 18:02, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is open to all, but if you consider Qworty to be a vandal-only editor then you should report her/him as such. Shearonink (talk) 03:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The majority of sources on Cote's film Windup indicate that it is a feature-length film. And by researching the Cannes Short Film Corner, it's apparent that a film may be entered that is up to 60 min. in length, which, according to mainstream film industry standards, is feature length. Also, I found that a small percentage of the Short Film Corner submissions are actually accepted, and so it is notable that the film Windup was accepted. Also, why not simply take a look at the film itself: as it is available on many distributor sites, here's one: http://www.filmannex.com/movie/film/22227/windup NickSoroka (talk) 03:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • looking at this wiki article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Bryce , which was given to me as a reference early on in the webchat forum, to help me, as this is my first wikipedia entry, it could be said that Ian Bryce is notable because he worked in production on some blockbuster films, as per imdb. likewise, David Cote has worked on some big films in the production side as director; dv director; line producer, and there are sources including the same "imdb" but also more (news articles, other urls), and so it follows that this page be kept on Cote. NickSoroka (talk) 03:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have added an additional news source: In an article titled “Filmmaker smells success at Cannes”, it is noted that award-winning writer, Gordy Hoffman, is reviewing Cote’s next film, “Inertia”. Also noted is that Gloria Gifford, and Ron Gilbert, two well known Hollywood actors turned teachers, are supporting Cote’s film. Ron Gilbert’s company, Rogue Arts, has already agreed to world-wide Theatrical and DVD distribution of “Inertia” [1].
I have contacted the various newspapers that I have referenced for my own past writing purposes, and am being emailed original copies of several articles. The first is noted above. If need be, I can email the articles, which have been scanned and emailed to me, if I am provided an email @wikipedia that I could send them to. Several more sources should be coming to me this weekend, some related to "Windup" and Cannes, others relating to Cote's community involvements and appointments to various academic positions. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.74.205.151 (talk) 03:08, 9 October 2010 (UTC) NickSoroka (talk) 03:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to read the Gordy Hoffman review. Where is it located (web, print, etc.)? And shouldn't "Inertia" be listed on Ron Gilbert's website along with his (Gilbert's) other distribution titles? Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 05:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
a distribution "deal" is an agreement, in contract form, between the production company and the distributing agent. This would get listed after post-production of "Inertia", once the film is complete (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filmmaking#Distribution_and_exhibition), therefore it wouldn't be seen on the website yet.
it seems that Gordy Hoffman runs the bluecat screenwriting competition, why not email to request for the write-up? Saira de Goede —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.233.97.220 (talk) 23:15, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Because that is not my job in a sense...I'm a volunteer who tries to help when I can and when I have the time. I don't have the time right now to e-mail Mr. Hoffman to check this reference. Shearonink (talk) 02:20, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The comparison between Dave Cote and Ian Bryce doesn't make sense. Ian Bryce has been an assistant director and producer on many unquestionably notable major motion pictures. The lack of sources in the Ian Bryce article is a serious problem and needs to be addressed, but the notability is hardly questioned. In the case of Dave Cote we lack both reliable sources and a solid claim of notability. —Tim Pierce (talk) 21:27, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • how do you figure that david cote lacks reliable sources and a solid claim to notability? what is notable? "Reliable sources generally include mainstream news media and major academic journals, and exclude self-published sources, particularly when self-published on the internet. The foundation of this theory is that such sources "exercise some form of editorial control."[5]" And does the David Cote article satisfy this? Yes it does. NickSoroka (talk) 22:47, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think that the article lacks a solid claim to notability because I don't think satisfies the guidelines at WP:CREATIVE—namely, Dave Cote has not in my opinion been principally responsible for creating a notable work. The day may yet come when he has attracted enough attention that it makes sense for Wikipedia to include a biographical article on him, but I don't think we're there yet. Nick, your dedication to this is commendable and your perseverance will serve Wikipedia well, but I'm sorry that I just don't think there's enough there for an article now. —Tim Pierce (talk) 02:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please see below, WP:CREATIVE and NOTABILITY have been satisfied.

NickSoroka (talk) 18:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


  • I will further add that I am new to Wikipedia and creating articles, and am LEARNING. I have read a lot of mean words and resentment, when all I am doing is creating an encyclopedic entry for a Canadian Filmmaker who I believe is quite notable, having started with nothing, and ended up with much support from hollywood, Cannes, and the film community. Also, Cote has made contributions to the community, in relation to Youth services and community planning. All of these articles are from News sources, and are on their way, being emailed from the authors on their own time. It has been quite an undertaking to get through to the authors and have them go through their own archives and scan the articles and email them to me. I did my best to source via the internet, but have come against harsh criticism. I am confident that by Sunday (October 10, 2010), all issues will be resolved and that the new sources I provide will clear up any questionableness with regards to "notability" and "source". NickSoroka (talk) 03:53, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Wikipedia is open to all, anyone and everyone can edit or post their thoughts. Sometimes people are intemperate with their comments, but you have to understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. The guidelines that other editors are mentioning and that might apply here are in place to hopefully prevent WIkipedia from morphing into a business directory or a blog or whatever. If you haven't read the following listed guidelines yet (I think they all apply in this case), you might want to refer to them - they're really helpful.
  • Additional Source Added: Brian Garrity, New York Post, June 12, 2007:
" David Cote traveled to New York shortly after the Cannes Festival in 2007. He worked with Cinematic Talent Agency as well as Abram's Artists in Manhattan, and booked a role in a USA National Busch Beer commercial. Cote seems to have a hand in all aspects of film and television [1]. Cote initially funded his film projects through earnings he made working as an actor in film and television <ref>[Modisha Martins, Maple Ridge News, "Filmmaker Smells success at Cannes", Wed., June 6th, 2007]</ref>." NickSoroka (talk) 07:41, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The subject clearly satisfies #3 of WP:CREATIVE. While IMDB is not a reliable source for biographical content, it is an accurate source for verifying what projects an Actor; Director; Producer; Cinematographer; Writer; Editor; Composer; Second Unit Director or Assistant Director; Miscellaneous Crew; Sound Department; Music Department; Art Director; Production Manager like David Cote has been involved with. These credits are supplied directly by the Writers Guild of America and the Motion Picture Association of America and are therefore highly accurate and reliable. The imdb list of credits for David Cote as all of the above mentioned roles is both long and impressive. (I wrote the above, forgot to sign in) —Preceding unsigned comment added by NickSoroka (talk • contribs) 23:16, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • As I stated above. Imdb is a reliable enough a source to establish #3 of WP:CREATIVE. Even with this source alone, it's called a "one source tag"; which would have been a better solution than dragging this through an AFD. Imbd does show what projects the person has been in and in this case shows he passes the third criteria of the WP:CREATIVE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.74.205.151 (talk) 22:31, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • The WP:CREATIVE guideline is that the person have "created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work." Unfortunately, none of the films that Dave Cote has had a significant hand in are notable. His involvement in notable films like Watchmen (film) and Battlestar Galactica has been limited to bit parts.

(edit conflict)

I think you are misunderstanding WP:CREATIVE #3 there.
...has created, or played a major role in co-creatingSee A below, a significant or well-known work,See B below or collective body of work, that has been the subject of an independentSee C below book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews
  • MULTIPLE PERIODICAL ARTICLES OR REVIEWS - Cote meets that criteria, see listed sources in article.
A. This refers to the people who make the work, ie (co-)director/producer etc. Playing a bit-part as "Man at Club" and so on does not confer this.
  • AS ABOVE, THE ARTICLES WRITTEN, INVOLVE A FEATURE FILM TITLED "WINDUP"; A FEATURE FILM TITLED "DON'T TELL MY AGENT(BOOKER)" - COTE WAS EXEC. PRODUCER/PRODUCER/DIRECTOR OF THESE FILMS. AND THESE ARE THE FILMS ON WHICH THE ARTICLES FOCUSED, IN RELATION TO COTE.
B. If these works were "significant" then we should have an article about them. If we don't, that is some indication they are not.
  • THERE ARE SEVERAL ARTICLES, SEE SOURCES AGAIN.
C. That is, independent reliable sources about these works - not the mere existence of them. Showing a person wrote a movie called "Foo" does not mean they satisfy the criteria; "Foo" would have to be a notable work, with the consequent independent materials about it.
  • A NEWS ARTICLE IS NEVER JUST ABOUT THE EXISTENCE OF A WORK, IT IS A STORY, THAT IS NEWSWORTHY, AND GOES TO PRINT. NEWSPAPERS ARE NOT ENCYCLOPEDIA'S STATING FACTS OF EXISTENCE (that's what Wikipedia and other Encyclopedia's are for), THEY ARE STORIES THAT ARE NOTEWORTHY, OR NOTABLE. THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF HAVING A NEWSPAPER. NOW IF WE ARE TO GO INTO THE PHILOSOPHICAL DEBATE OF WHAT PERCENTAGE OF NEWS PRINTED IS WORTHWHILE, AND TO WHOM, AND BASED ON WHAT, THEN YOU ARE GETTING INTO OPPINION.
The listing added shows that Mr. Cote appeared as an actor in several works; however, the CREATIVE criteria does not apply in those cases, as he did not "create or co-create".
  • AGAIN, IT IS NOT COTE'S "ACTOR ROLES" THAT YOU ARE BASING YOUR ARGUMENT ON. PLEASE STICK TO YOUR POINT. YOU HAVE FAULTY ARGUMENTS. YOU CANNOT EVALUATE A FILM COTE PRODUCED IN A) OF YOUR ARGUMENT, THEN REFER TO A FILM COTE ACTED IN AS B) OF YOUR ARGUMENT.
In the cases where he was director or producer, such as "Inertia (2011)", I do not see evidence that that work has been the subject of a book, film, or lots of periodical articles.
  • AGAIN, PLEASE STICK TO YOUR POINT. THE FILM IN QUESTION HERE, "WINDUP", WAS WRITTEN ABOUT IN SEVERAL NEWS ARTICLES. YOUR ARGUMENTS TEND TO JUMP TOPICS IN AN ATTEMPT TO VALIDATE YOUR POINT. HERE IS WHAT I MEAN: YOU ARGUE ABOUT A NOTABLE FILM (WINDUP), THEN SAY COTE ONLY PLAYS ACTOR ROLES (NOW REFERRING TO DIFFERENT FILM, IE: WATCHMEN), THEN STATE THAT THE WORK IS NOT YET CREATED (NOW REFERRING TO INERTIA.)
Also, remember that WP:CREATIVE is a guideline. At heart, the discussion here, is if Mr. Cote satisfies the requirements of notability - viz. if there are, or are not, multiple independent reliable sources writing specifically about this individual ('significant coverage').  Chzz  ►  23:51, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • AND ALSO REMEMBER, WE VERIFIED NOTABILITY. AND NOW WE HAVE VERIFIED CREATIVE.
  • Additional News Source Added:
"Dave Cote headed a group alongside the RCMP, Fire Department, City Hall and Parks and Leisure Services, to apply for a Youth Services Grant. Once obtained, the grant was used to solve initiatives within the Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows communities dealing with violence and intimidation, fire safety, and youth employment. The program was a success, helping raise the youth employment rate, as well as providing new programs for teenagers that would keep them away from the trend of bullying that was on the rise at the time of the grant project <ref> Jessica Whiteside, Tuesday, January 4th, 2000, Ridge Meadows Times, “Forum to guage opinion on areas of concern” </ref>." NickSoroka (talk) 02:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Additional News source (New):
"The $170,000 Youth Services Canada grant inspired Cote to pursue higher education, starting at Douglas College and then finishing at Simon Fraser University. While at Douglas College, Cote was elected to the position of University Transfer Representative. He used his own experience of being a “highschool dropout” to help guide youth in similar situations towards higher education <ref> Karin Mark, Wednesday, January 5th, 2000, The Maple Ridge News, “Project takes grassroots approach to youth issues”</ref>."
Again, I have all articles and can forward them as needed. NickSoroka (talk) 02:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Another source:
"As noted in The Local, “Windup” was a feature film with a cast of 50, shot in over 40 locations, with actors John Read, Lurene Music, Alex Bruhanski, Mel Tuck and Cote as billed cast. Windup was a feat never before accomplished on a budget under $10,000 <ref> Andrew Gold, Monday, April 9th, 2007 ,The Local </ref>." NickSoroka (talk) 02:41, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Indenting duplicated !vote  Chzz  ►  04:47, 10 October 2010 (UTC) Keep. Now, I have added many sources, and to the WP:CREATIVE, Cote is listed on imdb, as being involved in, as well as playing a role in helping create, many films, including producer and director. Further, I have sourced Cote's involvement with the community and youth in his early life, as well as his move up the ranks in College and University settings, not only as student but as political advocate. This leads into his film career, which is sourced many times now by verifiable and differing news sources. From what I understand, three reliable sources substantiates "notable", as per discussions i've had on the live webchat, and a news paper article is one of the most reliable. I think that now, based on the news articles, it can be deduced that the listed information on imdb is credible and true. I further deduce that based on the various sitings of fashion model websites that Cote is represented by worl-wide, it is obvious that this shows how Cote's travels in the fashion realm led to the production and involvement in the films "Don't Tell My Booker!!!" and "Model Culture". And so, it seems very reasonable to say that all of the sources in the article, and all of the content, should be kept.[reply]
Thank You, NickSoroka (talk) 03:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nick, your 'Keep" is already listed up above, thought you'd like to know that editors can make their opinions heard but only one vote will count in an AfD discussion. Shearonink (talk) 04:46, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This article meets all the criteria. As an argument, take a look at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Hibbert , sources three times by 1)imdb 2) ibdb and 3)http://americantheatrewing.org/seminars/detail/the_drowsy_chaperone_04_06 (which gives name as 'actor', nothing more.) Now edward hibbert has worked with david bowie, and edward norton, and appears on broadway, but none of this is sourced. David Cote (film director) is clearly sourced and not only in imdb but in many other publications and news papers. now, it's not even a question that edward hibbert belongs in wiki, and it is also not a question that david cote belongs in wiki. i nominate to keep the article David Cote (film director). Mr. Frank Salloway —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.64.37.68 (talk • contribs) 16:39, October 12, 2010— 76.64.37.68 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
    • As with the Ian Bryce article mentioned above, Edward Hibbert has worked on major productions whose notability is undisputed, and his work has apparently been significant enough to attract attention on its own right. If there was a review of Watchmen that called out Dave Cote for his work playing "Man in Club" then you would have a strong case for notability, but that just doesn't seem to be the case. —Tim Pierce (talk) 21:37, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • this is all so interesting, the different views. I have to say though Tim Pierce, you seem very one sided. There are news articles, many sites that ARE calling out David Cote's name as actor, director, and more. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notability_in_Wikipedia :
"Reliable sources generally include mainstream news media and major academic journals, and exclude self-published sources, particularly when self-published on the internet. The foundation of this theory is that such sources "exercise some form of editorial control."[5]"
now, the sources for David Cote are from News Sources, in print and one online. News Sources are deemed reliable in establishing notability for inclusion in wikipedia. And since the one online newspaper corroborates the in-print articles, it follows that several news sources have indicated that David Cote as a film director is notable. Further, there are several sources of David Cote working in the fashion world, and he is clearly on the fashion agency websites, which are the businesses that represent and employ david cote. since they could be sued for putting his image on their sites if it weren't true that he was associated with them, then it follows that David Cote notably works in the fashion industry. This fact is also mentioned in the other sources, which prove that it is highly probable, if not obvious, that david cote did produce the film "Model Culture", and while doing so, worked with other notable celebrities (this is also indicated in the listed sources). None of these sources are self-published, and therefore they do not violate the notability rules of wikipedia. Therefore, it seems that the only conclusion can be that david cote (film director) is notable, does not violate the inclusion rules, and should remain as an article in wikipedia. NickSoroka (talk) 22:44, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If I seem one-sided, it's because I don't think this is a very controversial case. You are correct that there are news sources to confirm that, for example, David Cote directed a movie called Windup, and that he attended Simon Fraser University. But the existence of news sources does not in and of itself make Cote notable; for that, the film itself would also have to be notable, and I'm not seeing the evidence. I don't think that exhibiting it in the Cannes Short Film Corner alone counts, and I don't think that potential future distribution deals qualify either. I'm sorry. —Tim Pierce (talk) 02:28, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • it is the individual at issue, not the film. if it's an article of creation for Windup, then yes, notability has to be shown on the film. The article created is David Cote, who has made notable contributions to the community in regards to lowering violence and bullying, as well as youth employment rates, then going on to make films, of which are notable in themeslves (to the degree that Cote's university and 3-4 newspapers wrote about it.) Let's agree to disagree on the notability of the film Windup, in particular. However, I think it's safe to say that Cote is notable as someone who's been in the paper as a film director who's emerged, made enough of an impression that these various papers sought it as "newsworthy", and put it to print. There was enough attention on the individual to illicit the media's articles, and from reliable news sources.

NickSoroka (talk) 02:41, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Nick - Please don't use ALL CAPS in your posts, that style is considered to be the Internet-equivalent of SHOUTING.
Everyone - Please assume good faith when dealing with other editors..
Please remember to sign your posts with four tildes (four of ~). Please post in order from top to bottom, in a thread and on page, the most recent posts being at the bottom of a thread or at the bottom of the page. Shearonink (talk) 03:53, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Also, everyone, please do not break up other editors' posts with your own replies Even if you disagree with another editor, please respect the process enough to leave others' comments alone. Just reply beneath their post and indent your comments with a colon ( : ).

Shearonink

Thank you, I wasn't meaning to yell, just to separate my text from the other writer, to answer on each point. But now I know to just answer underneath the whole message.. I answered each point because that's what I saw being done by other editors. Point taken:) I was top of my class in Logic & Reasoning, but not in anger management (thus the yelling - that's a joke;) NickSoroka (talk) 17:58, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Comment: I'm going to make an attempt to sum up the discussion so far, because trying to follow the discussion as it's listed above is making my head hurt.

  • Arguments in favor of keeping the Dave Cote article: Dave Cote is notable for having directed three films, one of which was accepted into the Short Film Corner at the Cannes Film Festival; for having worked on many other films; and for his work on youth services programs in neighborhoods in Ottawa. Reliable sources for this information exist at Maple Ridge News, Ridge Meadows Times and the Simon Fraser University alumni magazine. The sources for the Dave Cote article are at least as good as for other Wikipedia articles such as Ian Bryce and Edward Hibbert.
  • Arguments against keeping the Dave Cote article: Cote is not yet notable as a filmmaker because his work is not notable. There has not yet been significant coverage in independent reliable sources. The articles in Maple Ridge News etc. are a good start, but they are essentially local human-interest pieces; they don't constitute significant media coverage by themselves. Participation in the Short Film Corner is also promising, but that appears to be a professional networking program run as an offshoot of the primary Cannes Film Festival, and does not in itself seem to confer notability. Cote's work on youth services is laudable, but the sources here are too thin to confirm notability. On top of all this, the article's creator and chief author appears to have had some kind of professional relationship with Dave Cote and may still have one, which makes it yet more difficult to tease out potential conflict of interest issues.
My impression overall is that this is a filmmaker with what may be a promising career and who may yet become notable enough to satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines, but that this is clearly not yet the case. —Tim Pierce (talk) 19:03, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please note that the above "Summary" is actually a comment, and is written and filtered by the nominator of "Delete". Missed in the above comment are that there are additional sources (NY POST; The Local; BC News Group). I further summarize that the sources for David Cote satisfy WP:CREATIVE and NOTABILITY and that those are the only issues at hand:
    • Multiple periodical are written involving a feature film titled "windup" and a feature film titled "don't tell my agent(booker)" - cote was creator, and director of these films. Since these articles are printed in news sources (New York Post, Maple Ridge Times, Ridgemeadows Times, The Local), then they are notable, as newsworthy stories in print. Further, it is notable that Cote has contributed further to the community as is printed in more news sources.

This satisfies both WP:CREATIVE and NOTABILITY. NickSoroka (talk) 05:05, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am concerned about the possibility of meatpuppetry in this AfD. Of the three keep !votes here, two (Nick Soroka, the article's principal author, and Saira de Goede) have either worked on or appeared in Dave Cote's films. I would like to dismiss this as unimportant, but, unfortunately, I think the lack of plausible independent keeps points up Cote's general lack of notability. —Tim Pierce (talk) 15:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Well Tim, why not use Wikipedia:CheckUser to see that this is Not the case. You should be careful when jumping to such derogatory terms, and this is warned explicitly in meatpuppetry. It is also stated by Wikipedia that "Consensus in many debates and discussions should ideally not be based upon number of votes, but upon policy-related points made by editors." I fear that your arguments are invalid in that they use 'abductive reasoning', either Affirming the Consequent or Denying the Antecedent. The two examles you mention above are not Meatpuppetry, different IP's, and would not stand up to scrutiny. As mentioned above:

    • Your arguments tend to jump topics in an attempt to validate your point (ie: referring to the film "Windup" in the article, then jumping topics to another film "Watchment" to argue that Cote only played actor bit parts, then again jumping topics to "Inertia" in an attempt to say the film is not yet completed. The initial point of your argument, "Windup", satisfies WP:CREATIVE and Notability, but your Affirming the Consequent gives the impression that your argument is valid, when clearly it is not: see http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A821107.

Serious news editors (and Encyclopedic editors) should be careful when forming arguments, specifically in the case where one is biased. Stick to the facts: 1)Newspaper Articles validate Notability. 2)"Windup", "Don't tell my Booker", and David Cote, were written about as the focus of several independent News Sources. 3) Cote is also mentioned as the Producer and Creator of these films. Therefore: "Windup", "Don't Tell my Booker", and David Cote are Notable and satisfy WP:CREATIVE. NickSoroka (talk) 16:22, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP- I have to agree with Nick. I am not an editor, but I am a teacher, and I must say, the day we appeal to oppinion or faulty argument, over verifiable data, is the day we are in serious trouble. This is a very interesting page, and I will definitely check back another day to see the outcome! I reviewed the sources of 'said article', and it appears this Wikipedia entry should remain, based on news data. Of course, if this is a forum on oppinion, delete, and may our children inheret our new age;) Cheers, Timothy Wood —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.234.80.9 (talk) 18:21, 14 October 2010 (UTC) — 99.234.80.9 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Comment. Although it 'may' be the case that nicksaroka was affiliated at some point with a production of David Cote's, this does not dismiss the point that the article is notable and newsworthy. I think it is common for someone to put forth an article on a topic that interests them, or that they perhaps were affiliated with at some point in the past, as this is human nature. However, if nicksoroka did cross paths with David Cote years ago, I don't think this gives ample reason to dismiss the article's validity. Mr. Frank Salloway 76.64.37.68 (talk) 18:44, 14 October 2010 (UTC) — 76.64.37.68 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

  • Delete After following this debate, and cutting through the lengthy discussion, I am purely considering basic requirements WP:V and WP:GNG. I cannot see significant coverage in reliable sources which are about the subject. Therefore, I do not think there is enough verifiable information for an article.  Chzz  ►  15:21, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


  • Delete - For the following reasons:
This article's subject does not fulfill Notability as actor...
  • has not had significant roles in multiple notable films, television shows
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1755945/—Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.108.172.126 (talk) 21:08, 15 October 2010 (UTC)— 206.108.172.126 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • does not have a large fan base
  • has not made unique, prolific or innovative contributions to entertainment
does not fulfill WP:Notability (films)...Windup, Don't Tell..., Model Diaries...
General Principles - all films mentioned fail the 'general principle' parameters:
  • 1)not widely distributed, have not received any full-length reviews from two or more nationally-known critics
  • 2)not historically notable - none have been deemed notable by broad survey of film critics etc., none have been given commercial re-release or festival screenings, none have received major awards
  • 3)none of the films have been selected for preservation, are (not) taught as a subject of a university course
Other evidence of notability: none of the projects are a unique accomplishment in cinema.
The subject of the article does not fulfill Creative professionals...WP:CREATIVE
  • 1)not regarded as an important figure, not widely cited by peers
  • 3)Mr. Cote's films (WIndup, Don't Tell my Booker/Agent, Model Diaries...) are not significant or well-known works (and It is a misperception of their incidental appearances in "Don't Tell..." to state the majority of the various celebrities mentioned 'worked with' article's subject). Mr Cote's body of work has also not been the subject of an independent book/feature-length film/article.
Regarding using IMDb as a source:
~Acceptable: Writing credits marked with "WGA" that are supplied directly by the Writers Guild of America, MPAA ratings that are supplied directly by the Motion Picture Association of America. However, so far as I can tell none of Mr. Cote's projects have the imprimatur of either the MPAA or the WGA.
~Disputed usage: IMDb content which is in dispute about whether it is appropriate to reference on Wikipedia... Released films only: Sections such as the cast list, character names, the crew lists, release dates, company credits, awards, soundtrack listing, filming locations, technical specs, alternate titles, running times, and rating certifications.
Continuing issues with References... Reference #11 (as presently stated) in the Ref section does not seem to exist - there does not seem to be an article written by Brian Garrity dated in Jun 2007 in the 2 main publications I looked through (searched archives of New York Post and also searched Billboard both of which Mr. Garrity worked for in 2007, also did many Google searches for Garrity + Film + Cote, Garrity + David Cote, etc., within that timeframe).
Per Wikipedia is not a crystal ball: Any mention of 'Inertia' (especially for it being released in 2011) in the article should probably be scrubbed, this project has been in various stages of 'pre-production' since 2009. -- Shearonink (talk) 16:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
This articles subject does fulfill Notability as actor:
  • Has had significant roles in multiple films and television shows http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1755945/filmotype
  • Note: roles with a sir name are, in most cases, lead, supporting or principal role (Cote has 12 roles of this type in TV and Film that are widely distributed and known.)
    • Cote has a fan base, as indicated in the articles as well as fan pages. Although hard to provide via the internet, here are a few: Youtube (30,000 views of his work as a director); http://www.filmannex.com/ (on intro page is indicated that Cote’s film, “Windup”, is in first place in the “War of Films” competition, currently running.)
    • Has been invited to the Cannes Festival, with “Windup”, that was widely written about in News Periodicals.
In terms of notability as a film maker, Notability is met by various News Sources, both in print and online. Also, out of over a million film submissions to the Cannes 2007 Short Film Corner, Cote’s “Windup” was chosen, which is a great accomplishment. Adding to this, “Windup” is still winning film competitions, as is evident at www.filmannes.com, that is currently running. The Film Annex competition takes place in New York City, where their offices reside.
News sources:
  • Jessica Whiteside, Tuesday, January 4th, 2000, Ridge Meadows Times, “Forum to gauge opinion on areas of concern”
  • Karin Mark, Wednesday, January 5th, 2000, The Maple Ridge News, “Project takes grassroots approach to youth issues”
  • Andrew Gold, Monday, April 9th, 2007 ,The Local
  • Staff Reporter, June 7th, 2006, BC News Group, “Winding up a crazy dream”
  • MAPLE RIDGE TIMES NEWS
  • Modisha Martins, Maple Ridge News, "Filmmaker Smells success at Cannes", Wed., June 6th, 2007
  • Brian Garrity, New York Post, “Film Film $hoot”,Tuesday, June 12, 2007
  • Modisha Martins, Maple Ridge News, "Filmmaker Smells success at Cannes", Wed., June 6th, 2007
Note: News sources IN PRINT are favorable to those ONLINE, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sources#Sources
Note: IMDb is a reliable source, with information coming from the Writers Guild. It is widely used on Wikipedia. The Cote article uses both internal and external IMDb links, on both levels of actor and producer/director.
David Cote’s notability are from News Sources, the online film community and periodicals, that prove the reliability of the Cote article and establish notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Notability is passed on the level of an Actor, as well as the level of a Creator and Director.
NickSoroka (talk) 18:16, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Consensus

David Cote (film director) came through the Articles for Creation process. Initially the article was poorly sourced, and was nominated for deletion. Since that point, many new sources have been listed. Other initial questions were on Notability and WP:CREATIVE. Reasons and policy were brought forward to argue for and against these questions. Consensus is a process, to find a "middle ground", and administrative authority usually focuses on editor behavior and not on deletion. As the article for creation was created, and as sources have increased and policy has been properly followed, the aim of this AfD discussion is to improve the article, not necessarily delete it.

Please read Wikipedia:Consensus before commencing with any further discussion.

NickSoroka (talk) 06:33, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- You're kidding, right? the aim of this AfD discussion is to improve the article, not necessarily delete it. AfD is not the Article Improvement Workshop, it's where challenged articles fight for their survival and the unworthy majority are put to the sword. Carrite (talk) 16:50, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
->The "Additional Source" link posted above is not a link to NY Daily News stories about the article's subject, it is merely a listing of all instances of when the word "Dave" + the word "Cote" appear together on the same page of that newspaper. In addition, the link was added by an IP-editor who later impersonated 'Heron' and so, the link & its information should be disregarded. I have preserved its appearance on this page for future reference. Shearonink (talk) 13:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of whether the "Additional Source"/NY Daily News post is cosmetically struck-out (not deleted, not edited but leaving the text in a form that other editors are still able to read) or not, the information it contains is invalid for the purposes of this discussion. Shearonink (talk) 17:25, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 09:21, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I had erroneously thought that since this AfD had been re-listed consensus was being gathered all over again. I apologize to my fellow editors for the error and have therefore deleted my extraneous/second vote & changed it to a mere 'comment'. Shearonink (talk) 22:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. He only has minor roles in a few major films, major roles in minor ones, and the press coverage is local. Promising start, but he isn't there yet. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:01, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep. The films he made exist, as does he, and there's news articles showing it. Sounds like truth to me. Heron (talk) 23:18, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note... At 06:33 on 17 October 2010 99.233.97.220 (talk) deleted one of the symbols for strikethrough that /ƒETCHCOMMS/ made on the so-called "Heron" vote. I have restored the integrity of Fetchcomm's action. Shearonink (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
FYI, Heron has confirmed that this was a forgery. —Tim Pierce (talk) 18:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Obviously, when people start meatpuppeting, socking, and who knows what else to save a Wikipedia article, they know the article has no chance of survival. David Cote has not had any significant roles, and the coverage he has received is not enough to establish his notability. Maybe if he lands a major role and gets covered in-depth for it, he will be notable, but right now, this seems like a last-ditch attempt at publicizing a non-notable person. /ƒETCHCOMMS/ 03:43, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note... At 7:18 on 17 October 2010 NickSoroka edited the appearance of Fetchcomm's vote from a bold with three apostrophes to an italic with two apostrophes. I have restored the integrity of Fetchcomm's original vote's appearance. Shearonink (talk) 15:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Wow this discussion is intense. On behalf of Wikipedia, and on those interested in keeping this article, please do not break any rules or use any charged language, as it WILL NOT HELP. This said, as I have said before, the article satisfies WP:CREATIVE and Notability:
Note: roles with a sir name are, in most cases, lead, supporting or principal role (Cote has 12 roles of this type in TV and Film that are widely distributed and known.)
  • Cote has a fan base, as indicated in the articles as well as fan pages. Although hard to provide via the internet, here are a few: **Youtube (30,000 views of his work as a director); http://www.filmannex.com/ (on intro page is indicated that Cote’s film, “Windup”, is in first place in the “War of Films” competition, currently running.)
  • Has been invited to the Cannes Festival, with “Windup”, that was widely written about in News Periodicals.
As a film maker, Notability is met by various News Sources, both in print and online. Also, out of over a million film submissions to the Cannes 2007 Short Film Corner, Cote’s “Windup” was chosen, which is a great accomplishment. Adding to this, “Windup” is still winning film competitions, as is evident at www.filmannes.com, that is currently running. The Film Annex competition takes place in New York City, where their offices reside. News sources:
  • Jessica Whiteside, Tuesday, January 4th, 2000, Ridge Meadows Times, “Forum to gauge opinion on areas of concern”
  • Karin Mark, Wednesday, January 5th, 2000, The Maple Ridge News, “Project takes grassroots approach to youth issues”
  • Andrew Gold, Monday, April 9th, 2007 ,The Local
  • Staff Reporter, June 7th, 2006, BC News Group, “Winding up a crazy dream”
  • MAPLE RIDGE TIMES NEWS
  • Modisha Martins, Maple Ridge News, "Filmmaker Smells success at Cannes", Wed., June 6th, 2007
  • Brian Garrity, New York Post, “Film Film $hoot”,Tuesday, June 12, 2007
  • Modisha Martins, Maple Ridge News, "Filmmaker Smells success at Cannes", Wed., June 6th, 2007
Note: News sources IN PRINT are favorable to those ONLINE, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Sources#Sources
Note: IMDb is a reliable source, with information coming from the Writers Guild. It is widely used on Wikipedia. The Cote article uses both internal and external IMDb links, on both levels of actor and producer/director.
David Cote’s notability are from News Sources, the online film community and periodicals, that prove the reliability of the Cote article and establish notability for inclusion in Wikipedia. Notability is passed on the level of an Actor, as well as the level of a Creator and Director.
NickSoroka (talk) 07:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note... Since NickSoroka has already voted in this particular AfD, the preceding comment/Keep-"vote" should not be counted as another vote and should be considered as a Comment only.
Also - the assertion is made in the preceding post that 'Windup' was invited to the "Cannes Festival". Windup was actually submitted and accepted to the 'Cannes Short Film Corner' which is run by Cannes but per the Short Film Corner's own website the Corner should not be considered part of the main Palmes D'Or/"Cannes Film Festival" competition.Shearonink (talk) 18:05, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
NOTE- actually, there are many categories at the Cannes Film festivel:
  • The Official Selection
    • In Competition
    • Palme d'Or
    • Un Certain Regard
    • Out of Competition
    • Cinéfondation
    • Short Film Corner
  • Parallel Sections
  • 15 more categories..... so, as you can see, you are only mentioning one, Shearonink. [2] NickSoroka (talk) 03:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The Cannes Film Festival is the most prestigious film festival in the world, and any film entered and accepted is Notable. As per the above note, there are 20+ film categories, the Short Film Corner is but one of them. They are all a part of the festival, and you can simply do a search on the official Cannes film Festival website to see this (http://www.festival-cannes.com/en.html), now, as for a 'separate' website for the short corner, well, there are a hundred websites for Cannes and all the various categories. Stick to the official site, hit CTRL 'F' and type "short film corner" and PRESTO! There it is! NickSoroka (talk) 04:16, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Again, the Short Film Corner's official websiteEnglish versionFrench version states "The registration of your film at the Short Film Corner has nothing to do with the short film Competition or the Cinefondation." The Short Film Corner is run by the Festival but is not part of the main competitions for short films or part of the Cinefondation. A filmmaker at reduser.net[1] states his opinion as "The Short Film Corner is not a "selection", anyone can register their shorts and you pay for so. It's a big market and great venue/window for buyers and distributors, and also an amazing place for short film makers around the world to exchange, share and network." Shearonink (talk) 05:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Cannes web site appears to confirm this: http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/aboutFestivalHistory/aboutHistory.html says "The same year [2004], the Short Film Corner, a welcome and promotional platform for shorts, was created." The "Festival Milestones" page at http://www.festival-cannes.com/en/about/festivalHistory.html describes the Short Film Corner as "a market exclusively reserved to short films." It seems clear that a film entered at the Short Film Corner is not in competition, and so to say that it was "accepted at Cannes" is misleading at best. —Tim Pierce (talk) 11:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: At 07:50, 17 October 2010, NickSoroka a) edited the article removing display of the deletion notice [2] and b) moved this page changing the word deLetion (with an L for Lima) to deIetion (with an I for India) [3]. I have undone both these changes.  Chzz  ►  12:45, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wow.—Preceding unsigned comment added by NickSoroka (talk) 04:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Sufficient career achievement to merit inclusion. The question for me is whether or not the information is ACCURATE, VERIFIABLE, and WRITTEN NEUTRALLY. It seems to me that these fundamental needs are met. Carrite (talk) 16:50, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - The subject fails WP:GNG. Notability is not an optional criteria. Because it seems this article was created VIA Articles for Creation, I suggest a less antagonistic approach than to delete, which is to Move the article to Wikipedia:Articles for creation/David Cote (film director), as an erroneous creation, without redirect. This will preserve the history of this article while allowing future edits in NS=4. Declining the submission will not preclude future edits as well. My76Strat 16:55, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • note: this is technically a move, not a delete.NickSoroka (talk) 03:41, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have restored the bold "delete" !vote above, which NickSoroka edited. Please do not edit comments made by other users.  Chzz  ►  11:45, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It seems my comment above lacks clarity and I therefor offer this clarification. With regard to this AfD, Delete is the appropriate action when comparing the article to Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Mainly based on general notability guidelines and the lack of significant coverage to establish such notability. The suggestion to move the article back to articles for creation, was just that, a suggestion. It is entirely at the closing administrators discretion and valid arguments against such a suggestion exist. My76Strat 23:59, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All the information in this article is Accurate and verifiable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.69.60.99 (talk) 04:04, 18 October 2010 (UTC) — 70.69.60.99 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Keep. Information is Reliable and Accurate, Verifiable and Noteworthy. I like the comparison to Edward Hibbert and Ian Bryce. In reading through the articles, one would have to keep the David Cote article, as there is more verifiable evidence to support inclusion than there is in the Hibbert and Bryce articles.

99.233.97.220 (talk) 04:20, 20 October 2010 (UTC) — 99.233.97.220 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Comment - Further to this, I came upon David Cote on Wikipedia after looking him up because I rented a movie called "Darkest Hour" from Blockbuster Video, and David Cote plays the lead role of Tibor. Here it is, an "Alliance Atlantis worldwide release: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0475247/releaseinfo . J. Wise. 99.233.97.220 (talk) 04:36, 20 October 2010 (UTC) — 99.233.97.220 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

And once you had seen it, you were so impressed that you had to run over and make the acquaintance of Saira de Goede so you could post your comments from her computer? —Tim Pierce (talk) 05:03, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The news sources provided are as credible and notable as any other sources on Wikipedia. Jonathan Wise. 99.233.97.220 (talk) 04:22, 20 October 2010 (UTC) — 99.233.97.220 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: 99.233.97.220 has already submitted their "keep" recommendation above. I am changing this to a "comment" to reduce confusion over duplicate votes. —Tim Pierce (talk) 05:04, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It appears that the debate here is between those who see that the Cote article is Verifiable; Accurate; Noteworthy, and those who are looking for small technical reasons to delete it. Wikipedia should be an Encyclopedia based on Accuracy, Verifiability and Noteworthiness, not a Forum for tech geeks. ;) Hbtz (talk) 06:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)  confirmed sockssuspected socks[reply]

Keep. Many sources, most, if not all, reliable. I don't see what the debate is about. The article was created, wasn't it? Hbtz (talk) 06:21, 19 October 2010 (UTC)  confirmed sockssuspected socks[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.
  1. ^ [Brian Garrity, New York Post, “Film Film $hoot”,Tuesday, June 12, 2007]
  2. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannes_Film_Festival Wikipedia
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/David_Cote_(film_director)&oldid=1079660662"