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 as failing WP:N and WP:V. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 06:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Jayen Varma (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

This article has a number of problems, not the least of which is that there is little in the way of reliable sources to indicate that the subject does in fact hold a world record. I went through a Google search - News, Blogs and Web - to try and come up with solid reliable sources to back up the claim, and wasn't terribly successful. There are a lot of Google hits for Mr. Varma himself, but many of them seem to be variants on this article posted to locations that accept submissions. The two registries that are stated to have declared the successful world record also turn up few Google hits, and I have to wonder about their authority in terms of being an authoritative source for the base claim here. We can lump in the fact that the article has been edited by Jayenvarma (talk · contribs), Musicrecords (talk · contribs) and Worldrecordbassplayer (talk · contribs), and there's some conflict of interest involved as well. I think this needs some discussion as to whether it's an acceptable article. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:58, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nomination. I have tried to clean it up and reference, but at the end of the day, it just doesn't have the sources to show notability. ukexpat (talk) 21:38, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete From the message here, it seemed Jayan Varma was not entirely opposed to the deletion of the article if our notability requirements could not be met. I agree that there just aren't enough reliable sources. --Jh12 (talk) 21:56, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom.    SIS  22:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Regardless of verifiability, I don't see any inherent notability. There could be notability on two counts: (1) the achievement itself might be notable, or (2) the fact of having had the achievement recorded by some organization might be notable. As for the first case, is strumming a guitar quickly a notable skill, to the extent that anyone cares who does it the most quickly? As for the second case, suppose we could verify that some organization that recognizes world records had him listed for his achievement. For that fact to be notable, it would have to be noted elsewhere in one or more of the usual reliable sources. Otherwise, it means that his being recorded in the annals of that one organization wasn't found notable. Someone might disagree with this perspective, on the grounds that the recognition by the organization itself confers notability. My response is that such organizations often make money by manufacturing "notability" that really doesn't exist. With many of these stunts, the claim that a record has been set is highly suspect. How does anyone know that someone else, somewhere in the world, can't strum or hasn't strummed a guitar even faster? As far as we know, the achievement really amounts to "The person who has strummed the fastest in front of our officials", and as far as we know, that has been only three people. —Largo Plazo (talk) 15:13, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• From my talk page: I got reply with a meaning that, the page can not be fully accepted. Hence, I do not want to go deep in to the said subject. But I believe in Truth. Today is the Birth day of Mahatma Gandhi, who fought for truth. Truth is bigger than anything else.I do not want to go ahead with this with my pages filled with notices. So let it be deleted. Let Time proves everything.. Thanks and Regards JV I think that puts this towards a G7 delete at this point. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:03, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• The author has also blanked the page several times. Tony Fox (arf!) 16:04, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete It is basicly a self promo page which makes a neutral POV nearly impossible. The most vocal editor of the page appears to be the subject of the page and based on his posts on varrious talk pages has no understanding of what Wikipedia is about and considers it to be just another Blog

"Though I ve lots of Blogs in the net, I find only few are reliable. I consider Wikipedia as one of the most reputed ones. I agreed to delete my page only when Wikipedia was reluctunt to accept my post. But I wish to inform you that my World Record is very much Official as the Registry of official World Records which does it with Record Holders Republic is a competent Authority."

Wikipedia is not the place for self promotion. I also wonder if we are dealing with multiple sock accounts User:Musicrecords, User:Worldrecordbassplayer, and User:Jayenvarma Dbiel ^(Talk) 20:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I had earlier confessed that I was ingnorant of editing rules and that was the reason for making many changes and blanking it out of frustration. Sorry for the same. I ofcourse was dealing it like a blog. But I realise now that WP is such a very reliable and reputed Organisation. I appreciate your comments. And surely, like any other human beings, I am doing it to be noticed and everyone does it as self promo. I am to break my own record end of this month in front of 20000 people in India which will be varified by computer software then and there( this is yet to be confirmed by the organisers after discussion with GWR or RHR). . If anyone can play faster than what I did he can ofcourse break it and I told many people and organisations that I am ready to do demo infront of any great musicians to prove what I did, provided the notes per second should be varified by computer Thanks for all the informations. Regards JV

Comment:No one is denying that you are a record holder. What we (those who have commented to delete) are saying is that the article does not have sufficient sources to demonstrate your notability per the relevant WP policy on notability to be found at WP:BIO and that it crosses the line into self promotion, which is also not allowed: WP:SPAM. – ukexpat (talk) 15:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks With due respect to the WP editors, I thank for the above comment, which is really objective. I hence request the WP editors that the page may be made as if it doesnt look like self promo. Now, I would appreciate even if the page heading 'Jayen Varma' is changed to meet the WP policy. Regards JV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayenvarma (talk • contribs) 16:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If the topic doesn't meet the criteria for notability, then there isn't any way the article can be rewritten to change that. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:16, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for getting edited After going through the Rules and Criteria for notability,very carefully, I am convinced that the article requires changes. Now I feel I am not competent to edit it. Therefore I wish to submit the article to the WP Editors to scrutinise it to meet the criteria. Hope this can be accepted after editing by WP editors. Regards, JV

---

Registry of Official World Records (UK&USA) and Record Holders Republic (UK) in 2008 declared a world record in bass guitar for Fastest Percussive Bass Playing [1]. . The Record is 36 percussive notes per second, played by Jayen Varma from India. Percussive Bass, which is otherwise called slap bass is conventionally played by slapping the strings with Thump and Poping the strings with index and middle fingers. But the precussive bass style adapted by this Indian Bassist is in the same way that the Indian percussion instruments tabla and mridangam are played. Percussive Bass is played mainly in Funk Music, though it is widely used in many music now a days. Percussive bass style has been going through many major changes since it’s evolution in 1920’s and many Bass players play this using different techniques. More information in this can be had from the List of slap bass players (electric bass).

Reference

http://www.recordholdersrepublic.co.uk/recordholdersdetails.asp?id=484

External Link

1. http://www.myspace.com/jayenvarma

2. http://community.guinnessworldrecords.com/kickapps/service/displayKickPlace.kickAction?u=2700383&as=7691

The Recent Editing suggestion above I went through the notices in my page once again and could see the following notes:- .1)Delete: It is basicly a self promo page which makes a neutral POV nearly impossible 2)This article or section is an autobiography, or has been extensively edited by the subject, and may not conform to Wikipedia's NPOV policy. But when I looked in to this link: List of slap bass players (electric bass) For Eg; Pl see the profile of the 25th person in the said list. I do not want to name him. I could see that many of such in different profiles look like self promo and autobiographies or biographies of different bass players. Anyway I respect many of the Bassists in the list. Kindly look in to those with a neutral and indiscriminatory view. I however love many of those Bass players and respect them.

However, I have made changes in the above submission to get edited with a view that mine should not look like an autobiography or biography as per the WP policy. I have produced proof for what is written there. I have also received appreciation from many Bass players including the greatestJeff Berlin. In this context, I request to either approve my above suggestion for editing or kindly delete my page at the earliest since it is filled with many notices and that is indirectly affecting my profession. With due respect to all the WP Official Editors. JV —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jayenvarma (talk • contribs) 07:32, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Editing Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Feel free to edit the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed.'

Based on the aforeread notice in the article's page, editings has been made. I have done it to the best of my knowledge after due discussion with others who are familier in this. Please see if the editing is appropriate. If not it is requested that the article may be approved after making necessary changes as per the WP rules. And if it is not found to be notable, it may be deleted, since it is a long discussed article where there is no false information and proper reference is given. I am doing the editing since the notices are still there in the article's page even now. Thanks for the informations.. JV —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.237.129.163 (talk) 18:12, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The closing administrator will decide whether to keep or delete based on the discussion here. Tony Fox (arf!) 19:09, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks I request that a decision in this may be taken as early as possible since its a long discussed matter. Regards--Jayenvarma (talk) 01:28, 5 October 2008 (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.