Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Nick DeCamp


 * 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. —LrdChaos (talk) 19:49, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Nick DeCamp
This appears to be an attempt to collect quotes from an unidentified person. Google shows, besides the usual quote websites without useful info, several pages that suggest this may be a college student. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Vote closed. Result: delete (four votes to delete, two votes to keep; no changes were ever made to the page as a result of this discussion). —LrdChaos (talk) 19:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete unless notability evidence provided and (preferably) quotes sourced. I'll post a vanity-warn to the editor's talk page. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 04:56, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, concur with Jeffq. ~ UDScott 13:29, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is probably just a college student, but in any case, there's no evidence that any person by this name is notable. —LrdChaos (talk) 13:39, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Nick DeCamp was a columnist for The Center for the Easily Amused, which was a mainstream enough website that Dave Barry not only mentioned it but used it for internet guidance in his (traditionally published) book Dave Barry in Cyberspace.  The website itself, along with DeCamp's pages, seem to have disappeared, but archived versions can be found on The Archive.  Nick DeCamp was one of a small number of columnists for the site maybe five or more years ago.  This was before any random person could easily have their own internet column, so internet publication was much more notable.  Archives of his pages can be found at http://web.archive.org/web/*/http://www.amused.com/nick.html, where I got the listed quotes.  His quotes can also be found in various collections on the internet as he did have somewhat of a following.  Whether he is a college student I don't know (as I am only aware of him through his work, and know nothing of his biography), but if he was a college student during his years of peak activity (1999-2001) then in all likelihood he is no longer. Magnus the Great 20:18, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This is too tenuous an argument. The website has come and gone, like millions of others, so its former existence isn't very supportive. Dave Barry in Cyberspace also mentions websites like "The Toilets of Melbourne, Australia", "World Record Barbecue Ignition", and "Wave to the Cats", but that doesn't make them notable. The reference to "The Center for the Easily Amused" is in a footnote to the last of these. Just because Dave Barry found it interesting enough to mention it in his book doesn't make it especially noteworthy, and even if it was, that doesn't necessarily confer notability on one of its columnists. Are there any direct citations supporting Nick DeCamp himself? ~ Jeff Q (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * The other pages mentioned were generally mentioned as examples of inexplicable or arbitrary material on the web, while the Center for the Easily Amused was cited as a portal site. While DeCamp's notability is basically restricted to the internet, he continues to be quoted now, after five years, so he does seem to have some staying power, even if his website itself did not. Magnus the Great 23:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. - InvisibleSun 23:19, 28 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. - I am familiar with the CFTEA site, and have come across DeCamp's work before. I think it's a mistake to dismiss internet-based authors too easily on the basis of not being notable in other media, particularly when the quotations are at this level of quality. --LHollister 22:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I'm not sure what LHollister means here by "the quotations are at this level of quality". I observe that many Wikiquote editors, not necessarily including LHollister, are under the mistaken impression that every utterance is a "quote".  I would say that, as quotations, the contents of this page are mediocre in quality at best: none of them are sourced.  Whether they are good jokes or not is immaterial to whether they are valuable to WQ readers.  On that latter question, I am neutral.  121a0012 02:56, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Apologies for the poorly formed and poorly sourced article. All of the quotes are taken from the Archive versions of Nick DeCamp's original pages, as mentioned on the talk page.  I was planning to on filling out the article with more quotes, as well as properly citing all of them, in the near future, but I wanted to get the page started to get other fans contributing material which I don't have access to.  When it was marked for deletion, I thought it made sense to wait until that was resolved before putting the extra work in.  If the page is kept, naturally I will add the citations to the actual page. Magnus the Great 23:36, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Adding a proper source to one or two quotes could help us understand whether the sources are solid enough to overcome that particular issue. (For example, using an Internet Archive copy of an obscure website is not considered reliable by Wikimedia standards, but a specific print publication, commercial (non-vanity published) audiovisual program, or even a website with a solid reputation could be.) ~ Jeff Q (talk) 00:56, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: In response to 121a0012: the comment about "every utterance" sounds like a misunderstanding of the nature of these quotations. These are neither random utterances nor "jokes", but little wise sayings with absurd twists, in the mold of the "Deep Thoughts by Jack Handey" popularized on Saturday Night Live.  In my view, this is a comic style that has caught on in our culture, in somewhat the same way that "top ten lists" have come into vogue since David Letterman.  None of that makes this particular author worth keeping here, but jazz music should not be reviewed by folks who hate jazz, and I don't think DeCamp should be judged by those who don't "get" the comic form he's working with.  With regard to sourcing, from the archives cited above, it appears that DeCamp had a niche on the Easily Amused web site and periodically contributed sayings like these, and that little else is verifiable.  From the debate over Brad Simanek's similar (and IMO superior) work, I realize that the prevailing climate here is to expunge quotations from internet authors with limited notability in other media, but I felt that I should at least chime in on DeCamp's behalf since I find the page worthwhile. --LHollister 01:03, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * That means they are aphorisms. This article quotes some of them (or so it is to be hoped).  121a0012 02:23, 2 November 2006 (UTC)
 * The reason this is important, by the way, has to do with copyright law. In order to be legally allowed to quote from modern works, Wikiquote depends on being able to qualify as a "fair use" of those quotations.  One of the criteria set out in 17 U.S.C. 107 is "the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole".  In the case of these aphorisms, it could be argued that we are quoting the entire work, which would make it much more difficult for a fair-use case to be made.  121a0012 15:17, 2 November 2006 (UTC)


 * 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.