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 wasDelete while there are some very forcefully put statements for keeping the article notability hasnt been established from reliable, independent sources. Gnangarra 05:55, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Jason Kaplan[edit]

Jason Kaplan (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Non-notable. Fails WP:BIO. Subject has not been the subject of secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject. Only sources are from show rundowns and other sources within the Howard Stern universe. —Ocatecir ^Talk 04:38, 18 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, being a producer to a notable radio personality doesn't make you automatically notable. Lankiveil 12:21, 19 April 2007 (UTC).[reply]

• The assertion that the references are only in the Howard Stern Universe is unfounded. For instance, IMDB is NOT confined to the Howard Stern universe. Using the argument that being a producer to a notable person does not make one notable is flawed in the fact that all (radio/tv/movie) producers listed within Wikipedia would then need to be removed. In addition, Jason Kaplan is also a cast member of the Howard Stern Radio Show and Howard Stern On Demand, appearing in speaking roles countless times in both mediums. He is a credited professional photographer and writer. When one Googles Jason Kaplan, numerous independent references are available for verification.Skap30 20:46, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

IMDB is not an indication of notability, plenty of non-notable people have entries on IMDB. Being a producer does not make one notable. If someone has an article on Wikipedia they are notable for something other than simply their job title. Please read wikipedia's policy on biographies at WP:BIO for the notability criteria that qualifies one for inclusion in the encyclopedia. Also, a google search turns up many links for Jason Kaplans on the first page that are not the same person as the subject of the article. No secondary sources referencing Jason Kaplan of the Howard Stern show are present.—Ocatecir ^Talk 20:54, 19 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Secondary sources are not always necessary. WP:BIO also includes a 'special cases' section which states (one could safely include 'radio personalities') which Mr. Kaplan could be described as being a member of the Howard Stern Radio Show ensemble cast, a weekly contributor and a commentator on the Sirius Howard 100 "Wrap Up Show". There's a strong argument to be made that his membership as part of a popular radio show's ensemble cast qualifies as cult popularity. If the article is pulled one thing is for certain; it will end up as comedy fodder for the show;

From WP:BIO

Entertainers: actors, comedians, opinion makers, and television personalities

With significant roles in notable films, television, stage performances, and other productions. There's a strong argument that being on the ensemble cast of popular and certainly infamous radio such as the Howard Stern Show is 'notable'.

Has a large fan base or a significant "cult" following. Again, most fans of the Howard Stern show--at the very least more than a 'cult show'--are aware enough of Jason Kaplan to know his weight (230 by the way) from his weekly weigh-ins and his years run-ins with Stern side-kick Artie Lange. Virgil61 07:28, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment These nominations of certain Stern show employees has me wondering, specifically because of this in the special cases section:

The following criteria make it likely that sufficient reliable information is available about a given person. People who satisfy at least one of these criteria probably merit their own Wikipedia articles, as there is likely to be a good deal of verifiable information available about them and a good deal of public interest in them. Editors evaluating an article should assume that adequate research will support notability.[1]

Is "sufficient reliable information" and verifiable information different from "secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent, and independent of the subject"? This question is directed to anyone.

I ask because it has just occured to me that they certainly fit under the definition of people with a "cult following" but the nature of a "cult following" doesn't allow for a lot of outside reporting of the subject matter, does it? El hombre de haha 19:18, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• STRONG KEEP Kaplan is not "just a producer" any more than Baba Booey is. He's a radio personality and television personality on the vanguard radio show in the country, responsible for reversing the direction of an entire industry, particularly in regard to the non-terrestrial radio segment of it, during which time Kaplan was a member of the show. I'd be curious as to whether anybody who's actually a listener of the show would entertain the notion of their non-notability. Ocatecir, you're a member of the wikipedia Jackass project. The Jackass page links to not one but two seperate wikipedia entries for CAMERAMEN. This for an entertainment project which currently puts out a movie ever 4 years and maybe has a show or 2 at anytime on MTV2. Nobody has tried to create a seperate profile for any of the Stern show cameramen, who do make occasional appearances talking on a show that has 5 million listeners a day and had 20 million when it was free. Stephen's black friend 07:23, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please assume good faith. I listen to the show every day. Wikipedia has criteria for inclusion that goes beyond "I like it". Other articles are irrelevant to this deletion discusion, per WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. —Ocatecir ^Talk 16:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Famous, notable, and very important producer, radio personality, and television personality for which there is not enough WP:RS material to write an attributable article on the topic. Thus, the topic does not meet Wikipedia notability guidelines and the article cannot meet Wikipedia article policy standards. -- Jreferee 04:40, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep A cast member and producer of one of the most popular radio shows in history is notalble. --Oakshade 05:42, 25 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Marksfriggin.com is ran by a fan of the show and exists outside of the Stern show, that is one independent source. He posts specific show run downs that offer a lot of information not on and independent of the "Howard Stern infrastructure." Howardstern.com sources can be used as long as other independent sources are also used. I consider marksfriggin.com an independent source. However, I would like to see a clean up, inline citations and more diverse sources if possible. hombre de haha 20:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Though I agree Marksfriggin.com is a great resource to catch up on the show, it is still a fansite with no reputation for fact checking, so it does not meet the standards of WP:RS. —Ocatecir ^Talk 02:03, 27 April 2007 (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.