Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Michael Scott Gallegos

Michael Scott Gallegos
This article was prod because "Not sufficiently notable." The tag was removed and further materials were added (including the word notable), with a note on the article talk page. There is no Wikipedia article on this person or his business, and what we have here are quotes from his personal blog, which has no evident following. The "quotes about" section resembles nothing so much as an advertisement for his business, consisting of blurbs saying little more than that it is available. — Ningauble (talk) 17:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 18:00, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as nom. I notice that on the same day the article was created (by a regular contributor) a single-purpose account named Michaelscottstudios was registered, uploaded some images at Commons, and added them to the article. This is suggestive of a conflict of interest or personal involvement with the subject of the article. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:04, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: I had initially PROD this article because I thought it was a clear case that would not need to be discussed. Rather than offering evidence that the subject meets any established criteria for inclusion, extensive objections below appear to center on rejecting policies, practices, and precedents for using Notability as an inclusion criterion. ELApro argues that notability should not mean the writer has been noticed, but that he ought to be noticed if a contributor believes something he has done or written is interesting or entertaining. Kalki argues that the person might "perhaps eventually" become notable enough for Wikipedia (which could be said of anyone and therefore signifies nothing), and that notability is indefinable (hence evidently means whatever one wants it to mean). Michaelscottstudios, an interested party, argues that some quantity of web hits (and meritorious acts) makes someone notable. Notwithstanding any subjective reasons why someone may or may not come to be noted in the world at large, it is well established in our policies, practices, and precedents that we use the relatively objective criterion of whether someone has actually been noted in significant, independent, reliable sources, whatever ineffable reasons may have prompted that notice. The plain fact of the matter is that this person's writings have not received any notice in reliable independent sources. None. I urge the closer to consider carefully whether arguments given here represent a consensus to overturn the policies, practices, and precedents for using Notability as an inclusion criterion. ~ Ningauble (talk) 15:45, 31 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete, per nom. ~ UDScott (talk) 19:13, 8 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Ralires (talk) 19:10, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
 * — Ralires (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

http://www.alexa.com/siteinfo/thoughtaudio.com The fact that there is no Wikipedia page on Gallegos is not relevant to the notability question. I have also initiated other articles, such as "Henri Levaufre," which do not yet have corresponding wikipedia articles. Henri has only published one book, but this does not detract from his "notability." The article's quotes are not from a "personal blog." They are offered with the classic literary works that Gallegos has professionally narrated for ThoughtAudio. He is a noted photographer in the San Francisco/Oakland area and is "official photographer of Jack London Square, premier distination site for the city of Oakland, CA," as noted in the introduction to the article. His production company, Michael Scott Studios, was commissioned to create photographs for the book Oakland Welcomes the World (1996), also as noted in the introduction. In answer to the criticism about the "Quotes about Gallegos" section, there existed no such section until the notability question of Gallegos was placed on the table. That section was created for entries verifying the notability of his works by independent 3rd parties (the issue raised by the tag placed into the article, without previous discussion) and it includes eduational institutions, among other independent parties utilizing his free audio books site. I will be glad to move some of the quotes under that section to the notability discussion pages, if they are being interpreted as "blurbs saying little more than that it is available," as long as they will be recognized as recognition of the quality of his productions from independent 3rd parties, the issue under discussion. The "notable" link to wiktionary in the article's introduction was also added in response to the notability criticism. As noted, this definition is "1. Useful; profitable. 2. Prudent; clever; capable; industrious; thrifty." All fulfilled by Gallegos and his professional works. There are no links to Gallegos' other production companies, such as his fine art gallery (michaelscottgallegos.com) and his digital media production studios (xlrq.com) which specializes in elearning content development for corporate universities and training systems. References are made only as descriptions of his professional recordings and other freely accessible professional productions. The quality of the quotes in the article are also notable. It is my opinion that they are entertaining and contain a few philosophically oriented observations of interest and value, not to mention that they simply make for some fun reading and for an opportunity to share the artist/writer's unique and ingenious viewpoint with respect to our modern, technological world. The high quality photographs that he has contributed to the public domain at the wikimedia commons in association with the article are also of value. In response to the comment: "I notice that on the same day the article was created (by a regular contributor) a single-purpose account named Michaelscottstudios was registered, uploaded some images at Commons, and added them to the article. This is suggestive of a conflict of interest or personal involvement with the subject of the article..." I will say that I notified Gallegos after creating the entry, and am delighted that he contributed the photographs. I also worked with Christian Levaufre, the son of Henri Levaufre, in the research and preparation for his father's article, and with, the highly respected Seattle-based glaciologist, in preparation for his Wikipedia entry, and for that of his brother, , a Silver Star recipient who sacrificed his life during the Normandy invasion. This is also true of other articles I have researched and created in Wikipedia and Wikiquotes, but I do not believe that this has detracted from the quality of those articles, or caused the notability of the subjects or the referenced material to be brought into question.
 * Keep ELApro (talk) 21:04, 14 December 2016 (UTC)... Gallegos has produced the notable ThoughtAudio, a first class, highly ranked web site which gives away, free of charge, audio books professionally narrated by Michael Scott Gallegos in his own professional recording studio at Michael Scott Studios. The web site can be compared with librivox.org or archive.org (although offering lesser quantities of literature) as far as making free audio recordings of classic literature available to the general public, worldwide. The income from these free audio book distributions is based upon donations. It is internationally ranked amongst the ten highest English language audio book web sites. Its global audience geography is roughly as follows: U.S. 24%; India 10%; Egypt 10%; Russia 2%; 54% other coutries across the globe. Some statistics on his site may be verified at Alexa.com...
 * I am baffled by the assertion that these quotes are not from a personal blog. Every single one of them is cited to a post at https://cm3kz0ut.wordpress.com/ which, on reviewing the list of posts, does not appear to be any other kind of thing than a blog. In fact, the cover page describes itself as "THE COMPLEX NOW WordPress Blog, the one you are reading right now." Also, I have searched without success in the ThoughtAudio website for evidence that this material is part of its offerings, rather than simply being offered by the same person. Can you provide a citation supporting your assertion that "They are offered with the classic literary works that Gallegos has professionally narrated for ThoughtAudio"? ~ Ningauble (talk) 14:50, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * Alligator @ThoughtAudio.com ~ ELApro (talk) 00:41, 18 December 2016 (UTC)
 * OMG! If you listen to Barroom Brawls: single shots of stories and poems by Garcia Mann, offered here with the description "Barroom Brawls is an eclectic sampling from his latest collection of short stories and poems", what you get is one story credited to Garcia Mann and this other thing by Mr. Gallegos as seen on his blog. This has got to be one of the sneakiest forms of self-publication I have ever seen! My estimation of ThoughtAudio doing "good work" by making audio books of classic literature available just went down by quite a bit. At least someone over there had the good judgment to omit or remove this peculiar thing from their title list. ~ Ningauble (talk) 17:53, 18 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I think it's a problem that the quotes given in the article don't appear to be quoted in secondary sources, but as I found at least some of them interesting, I'm !voting weak keep, on the authority of ELApro. Should this article be kept, the About section will need to be trimmed so it doesn't read too much like a promotional piece, as pointed out above. ~ DanielTom (talk) 11:11, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep — I can agree that some of the quotes that have been provided do not appear to be of extreme notability in themselves, but some clearly indicate a range of wit and wisdom far greater than that of those most inclined to severely condemn or absolutely exclude such observations.
 * Though not yet provided with a Wikipedia page, the individual seems notable enough by some criteria of influence in the world to perhaps eventually merit one, and apart from that seems generally nobly rather than ignobly motivated. I have long been very alert to the tendency of those who have become ignobly corrupted in various ways to most eagerly and zealously impugn the motives and inclinations of others, and assume they are dishonorable in various ways. I usually do not even like to point out this fact, and am genuinely most pleased when people who fall into such errors rise out of them with gentle prodding towards virtuously charitable inclinations rather than harsh and embarrassing confrontations with the many of the generally detrimental consequences of many of their damnable condemnations.
 * I believe that most people usually have enough intelligence and sense of rational integrity to perceive that "notability", like many aspects of many things, is NOT an "absolute" or absolutely definable quality", and when they retain rational and ethical integrity are NOT inclined to treat it like it is, but something always provisional and largely subjective, and dependent on more factors and criteria than can conveniently formulated. I am usually against the tendency to far too rigorously constrain and define many aspects of many things in ways primarily accommodating the limited perceptions, conceptions, sensibilities and inclinations of a very few people.
 * Treating "notability" like it is an absolute, especially when the most knowledgeable and well informed of people can clearly perceive it clearly it is always provisional in many ways, might seem advantageous to some of particular propensities of some people, but is generally detrimental to many of the most vitally important principles and generally honored values of Humanity. I actually have MUCH more I would eventually like to say on such matters, but certainly have not time to do so now.
 * I just took a few minutes before leaving for most of the day to indicate some of my thoughts, and actually eliminated some of them not immediately crucial to this matter. As I have noted previously, I have been extraordinarily busy with other things this year, and when some tasks and burdens have been alleviated, even more stessful and time-consuming ones have often arrived to take up even more of my time, and I have not had much time to deal with many matters here most of this year. I am hoping to have at least a period of a month or so early next year when I can more thoroughly examine and consider many matters, here and elsewhere. As of now I must once again soon be leaving for most of the day, anticipating only at most an hour or so to return home, to do QOTD work before being off again for most of the remainder of the day. I actually have several appointments today which might permit me only much less than hour here, later in the day, and must be leaving in a few minutes, as I am slightly behind schedule, in taking time to type up this note. So it goes… ⨀∴☥☮♥∵ॐ … Blessings. ~ ♞☤☮♌Kalki·†·⚓⊙☳☶⚡ 13:42, 15 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep - Providing free audio books to over 30,000 people globally per month through thoughtaudio.com, alone seems quite notable on an individual effort scale. Anita Scott (Unbiased wife and supporter of Michael Scott Gallegos's creative and philanthropic endeavors for over 35 years)Michaelscottstudios (talk) 05:06, 16 December 2016 (UTC)
 * — Michaelscottstudios (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.