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 Keep (NAC) RMHED 19:15, 19 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Boba Phat[edit]

Boba Phat (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

No way this is notable. Just no way. Ok seriously, the references are either completely unreliable (Youtube, Facebook, Flickr) or not really about Boba Phat but just includes him among photos of funny people at a convention. This seems related to Miss Clit that is also up for deletion. Apoc2400 (talk) 17:52, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep With the assistance of Vyvyan Basterd, Miss Clit has been redirected to Blowfly's page, as I will agree while notability may be proven, defamation may be substantiated. However, Boba Phat is without a doubt a debate I am not going to give up as anyone who is ANYONE among the Star Wars, Cosplay & Comic Convention scene are aware of his notorirty, including a plethora of celebrities.SheighZam (talk) 08:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This AfD is being debated by editors in an external forum.

Worth chiming in after the addition of a very local interest story claimed as significant coverage in reliable sources. Possibly adequate for verifiability (I will not take swipes and Long Beach, I will not take swipes at Long Beach), but not for notability. Bongomatic 03:21, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
RE: Ten Pund Hammer - *"Strong delete Sources just don't cut it; almost none are actually even about him."
As I am newer to Wiki, I cannot figure out how to send a message to your talk page, so I am opening up the discussion here, as I have already addressed this issue with all the other Wikipedia experts who expressed similar doubts here on this page directly to their talk pages & have found their responses to be extremely helpful.
Please review what you are stating prior to going with the flow. This is NOT a strong delete candidate. You are misinformed: ALL sources cited are specifically about him, every single one. A multitude of 3rd party sources - print, broadcast & online - are cited, as well as additional resources added as a result. I have appealed to the other Wikipedia experts here, and do not feel as though I should have to continually explain the verifiability of Boba Phat. He is considered an "A-List cosplayer" (yes I can send you the link that referred to him as that, but they were simply 2 drunk cosplayer girls in a YouTube video - although they ARE fans of country music, if that helps my argument any). Regardless. Please review the sources particularly the 3rd party media references I recently added on Boba Phat's page before jumping on the "strong delete" bandwagon. There are a lot of people who deserve notoriety, even though they are popular among a niche group (Lee Hazlewood? Boyd Rice??) I urge you to reconsider the "strong delete" tag upon further review & understand that there WILL be additional media coverage of Boba Phat in the near future based on articles/photos he has done for additional objective 3rd party media sources, such as Star Wars Insider. Short of literally listing every resource, please refer to the Boba Phat article & check each reference to discover his notability. Additionally, Google Boba Phat, and you will see that even without Wikipedia, he occupies a minimum of 7 of the top 10 organic links. I am tempted to whack you with a trout, but around my part we don't use Minnows or Trouts, and unfortunately I don't have any Big Mouth Bass handy.
Very Best,
Shannon SheighZam (talk) 10:29, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
There is nothing here that comes close to establishing encyclopedic notability. Bongomatic 14:05, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I concur with the above editor as there is nothing that features him as a "notable" person. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • YouTube Video is illustration of popular meme that was uploaded & rapidly spread after one of Boba Phat's first appearances
  • The San Diego Union-Tribune (website: Signonsandiego.com) is a 4-time Pullitzer Prize-winning publication with its own Wikipedia page RS as it is the official newspaper of San Diego, just as the Long Beach Press Telegram is for Long Beach. The ENTIRE article is about Boba Phat as well; if you consider the LBPT as RS, there is no DOUBT this constitutes as well.
  • BuzzFeed I concur is Blog aggregator, however expresses him internet meme status
  • Craig Ferguson clip is a direct mention about Boba Phat from Kristen Bell, star of Fanboys, a hugely successful Star Wars movie, as she is a major celebrity to be mentioning him on a live talk show. He is the ONLY cosplayer she voluntarily mentions.
  • Facebook post is link to J. Scott Campbell (extremely famous Marvel comic book artist) who references Boba Phat as his favorite cosplayer of all.
  • Twitpic is photo taken firsthand & posted by Jane Wiedlin of The Go-Go's (the Go-Go's should need no explanation). Note spelling of Boba Phat is accurate as his recognized moniker.
  • The YouTube Video(s) are uploaded by Jeff Gritchen, who is the staff photographer for the Long Beach Press-Telegram, which is the one source you DO deem as RS, as indicated on http://www.insidesocal.com/modernmyth/2009/10/its-stan-lee-day.html (scroll down for attribution)
  • Metromix is a NATIONALLY recognized news organization with reports in all MAJOR cities and massive coverage. Metromix is a joint venture between newspaper publishers Tribune Co. and Gannett, and has its own Wikipedia page and definitely meets RS requirements.
  • Metromix - The ENTIRE 1:20 video interview is about Boba Phat, NOT 1 second clips. Though there ARE 2 additional Metromix videos that do represent him for several seconds, he is the feature of this video & commentary is COMPLETELY 100% about him.
  • FLICKR video is by newsreporter at Vuze.com (formerly Azureus) which is a free BitTorrent client used to transfer files via the BitTorrent protocol, and also has it's own Wikipedia page expressing its RS.
  • "Crashing the Con" has a >15 minute long interview with Boba Phat, and is available for purchase through Amazon. According to director Doug Thigpen, Boba Phat is one of the v=favorite characters (which can beseen in a clip on the cite's web page & commentary on the YouTube trailer).
  • LA Weekly article speaks for itself. CLEARLY RS - owned by Village Voice and admits he is the paper's "Perennial Favorite Cosplayer" which says a LOT given the paper's distribution & coverage.
  • Publisher's Weekly & Guardian are cited to quote size of attendees at San Diego Convention to express how much of an impact 1 mere character has on a convention with between 125,000-140,000 attendees. Citation was included as necessity for validity of numbers.
  • Both Fox 5 images are an example of how important they deemed Boba Phat to feature him in 2 out of just 30 impages of the 125,000-140,000 attendees at the convention. Fox Broadcasting has indisputable RS value.
  • StarWars.com website is a link to the interview he participated in for the upcoming Lucasfilm documentary. There is no footage available about ANY of the characters yet, as film is in preproduction. Included as a resource to express his upcoming movie appearance, however I can see where this may question RS. However until George Lucas permits the rights to be released, that is what can be uploaded to a public forum like Wikipedia.
  • 562 City Life photo is expression of Boba's notoriety by name - though "Phat" is correct, they do spell Boba as Bobba (sic). I could also have uploaded (& plan to a photo from the LBPost.com, which too mentions the subject by name & is an RS source but have yet to get a hard copy other than what is online).
  • The Daily Titan DOES mention Boba Phat by name under photo, again expressing his recognition by moniker. The only other photos of the convention included in the publication were of world famous artists such as Stan Lee, Jim Lee, Jeph Loewb, J. Scott Campbell, and Darick Robertson. Not bad company for a "simple, non-notable" cosplayer.
Finally, until I have a hard copy of the LBPost article, I can offer this: http://www.lbpost.com/ryan/6755 where Boba Phat is featured n the last photo. As I do not live near Long Beach, I have not had the opportunity to pick up the hard copy, but if I do & he is mentioned more than that terrific picture, I will be sure to include. Hopefully this long list extensively expressed WHY the above desreve notoriety & are worthy of reconsideration. Thanks again for the reconsideration, and please take the above into account. Boba Phat is quite a bit more notable than MANY articles already listed on Wikipedia with substantially less media coverage or following.
SheighZam (talk) 15:40, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What you are missing is that the articles aren't about him. They are about the various conventions he goes to. He has a novel costume, but in the end he is only an example of that convention....Hell In A Bucket (talk) 16:11, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The articles & photos ARE about him, specifically. Only 2 quotes (the ones that cite the attendee number of SDCC) are referenced because it is proper etiquette to cite any numerical figure, thus they must be included so that I can back up my facts statistically. Perhaps the StarWars.com link is inconclusive because I cannot disclose any more than what George Lucas has allowed into the public realm without significant legal ramifications. Also, Boba Phat does not do certain conventions - New York, Baltimore, Ohio.... there will not be mentions of him there because he does not participate in those. The articles above all find him significant enough in one way or another to feature him in what they deem as newsworthy to promote/sell their publicity &, like any typical publication, increase their ratings. The reason for this is because of his notoriety at the above-mentioned conventions. In the upcoming year there will be several new conventions, just as this past Long Beach Convention was its inauguration, there will be another in Anaheim. Star Wars Celebration V won't occur until 2010 where he was legendary at SW IV) so until Anaheim in March, SDCC in July, and any other convention that appears within the near future, as well as the release of the Lucasfilm & "Star Wars: Uncut" movies, there may be a gap in time between articles. It's not like he wears the Boba suit to the bank, although that may be pretty funny. I only included articles that have specific photos or news mentions of him. There are COUNTLESS articles about San Diego Comic Con, Wizard World, The Star Wars Concert Series, Star Wars Celebrations, the newer, smaller conventions. Please note that NONE of those are referenced - only articles that depict Boba Phat in some way are cited. SheighZam (talk) 16:58, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment Though you lean toward weak keep, please note that your opinion of the subject matter as "a dork dressed up in a suit that news find cute & makes and integral part of their Con coverage" is precisely what makes him attractive to that community. Rather than expressing that he is a dork in a suit, he happens to be a rather unique individual DRESSED UP AS A DORK in a suit, albeit a creative approach to an old, used idea. He brings originality. Similar in many ways to a Sports Team mascot yet for the increasingly massive Cosplay, Star Wars & Comic Books scene. And to be clear, under NO circumstances CAN or WILL money be made from his appearances - this is strictly prohibited by George Lucas et al. As far as the rest of your reasons for keep, I 100% agree. Wikipedia is nice that it allows for opinions to be debated, and also is known for introducing up & coming characters that may have - or in this case - already have had a major impact on news coverage within a niche scene. I do believe that you are spot on with your claim that "each editor must objectively try to ascertain whether or not sources are significant per guidelines or not. Sheer amount of sources in this case indicate 51% yes (at least to me). If certain groups vote "delete" collectively (especially if they are experienced and intelligent), that subtly influences the decision each editor must reach and is plainly unfair." Thus the debate seems quite one-sided to me, as he has already been declared newsworthy & notable among several types of media. SheighZam (talk) 04:04, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]


=COMMENT ON VOTES= There is I believe 4 deletes remaining and 6 keep votes. Sorry but the votes were getting confusing so please double check and refactor my number on this comment with my permission. I have no intentions of reversing my vote at this time but a few more consecutive keep votes might warrant a snow close.Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:00, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Hehehe, aren't you sorry now that you said that? :-) Viriditas (talk) 08:56, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
COMMENT RE: "double check and refactor my number on this comment with my permission" as per Hell In A Bucket, Tally is as follows:
Keep (9 - NOT including myself and the 2 votes deemed questionable by Viriditas): Vyvyan Basterd, Ten Pound Hammer, IronGargoyle, Cyclopia, R.D.H. (Ghost in the Machine), CobaltBlueTony, Milowent, Turquoise127, DGG, Casliber. Again, I DID NOT include myself, Daxst16 or SavetheRobots80 based on Viriditas's comment, however I do believe all 3 SHOULD be countable). Regardless, for Delete (6): Apoc2400, Drmies, Bongomatic, Hell in a Bucket, Samir & Kevin. Presently WITHOUT the inclusion of 3 (I believe, justifiable) KEEP votes, the tally as it stands is 9-6 in favor of KEEP. Tally taken at the time following my signature SheighZam (talk) 11:44, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
This is interesting a new account with a first edit at an afd?!? Hell In A Bucket (talk) 04:48, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, which guideline on notability provides that notability is demonstrated by "the public requesting pictures and autographs"? Bongomatic 04:50, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I've been a reader of articles of wikipedia for some time, but have never had an interest in commenting on a particular article until following this one closely. I'm familiar with the way this site works since I work at a search engine optimization company, but have never felt the need to activate a standpoint. In this case I've specified that I find the citation leaning towards notability. It is my first hand experience that created my desire to comment upon how that notability is worthy of consideration. 98.64.75.220 (talk) 05:09, 15 October 2009 (UTC) — 98.64.75.220 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]


  • This confuses me.... how does an editor who has not commented on either of my articles in the past happen to be attributed to having more than one vote? When I made the error of adding KEEP several times, it was pointed out to me that this is not how things work on here, thus I have refrained from doing that once the error of my ways was clarified. However simply because somebody supports this article while having clearly had no contribution whatsoever to the article in the past confuses me as to why you would think there was more than one vote attributed to that editor. Furthermore, your reply to Hell In A Bucket makes it appear as though you are accusing ME of adding additional votes. i believe that the amount of unrelated people who support the KEEP standpoint versus those opting for DELETION have less internal factionalism than the other way around. Please clarify. SheighZam (talk) 09:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ok, I struck out my comments. Since you're new, my comments can be used as a teaching example: They are an example of assuming bad faith rather than good faith. However, Daxst16 (talk · contribs) was created to vote in this AfD and Savetherobots80 (talk · contribs) has a total of 21 edits and his account has been "sleeping" since May. Don't mind me. Viriditas (talk) 09:55, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
We do however act oin a consensus and if it doesn't have a snow ball chance in hell we close. That being said it was getting confused because everytime Shiegh was posting it came with an additonal keep so I was trying to clear the waters. Hell In A Bucket (talk) 14:37, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - not bludgeoning anyone as you suggest, Turquoise127; merely stating facts that I believe are pertinent. I am sorry if in your case you ended up regretting your plight, perhaps I will end up in the same boat; perhaps not. As for VOTES, I merely responded to Hell in a Bucket's =COMMENT ON VOTES=. I understand consensus, but as the word VOTE was issued, I opted to follow the wording of someone who has been around here longer than me. As far as your changing your vote opinion if "brand-spanking new editors" arise, that's out of my hands. It appears as though one had already been on here from even before I registered. As far as the other, perhaps they were incited to respond as I was the first time I noticed an article that aggravated me enough to activate a Wiki account & get started (a misspelling on Blowfly's Punk Rock Party article). Threatening me with a vote change as though I am responsible for this seems a bit counterproductive, as it has absolutely nothing to do with the notability issue at hand. That said, I will continue to make arguments worthy of consideration, as it IS consensus based on arguments, exactly as you stated. As per my obvious confusion about the multiple "keeps", I removed them to avoid the confusion so that Hell in a Bucket could establish a more credible tally as he stated (and I quote): "please double check and refactor my number on this comment with my permission". So I did. SheighZam (talk) 16:00, 15 October 2009 (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.
More