Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Victor Beck

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete - by my count, all but one keep vote is by a pretty obvious sockpuppet. CDC (talk) 19:08, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Victor Beck[edit]

Vanity article on an opera singer that I can't seem to find any recordings by. Allmusic hasn't heard of him. Likewise google cannot confirm any of the claims made in this article, including the song he wrote or his connection to "Ask the Rabbi". If reliable sources can be found for all this infromation I could change my vote here. -R. fiend 17:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep — [1] [2] [3] ... Cantor Victor Beck seems well documented. Possibly parts of the page need confirmation? — RJH 18:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • All those pages confirm is that he exists and he was one of 141 people to meet the Pope one day earlier this year. Neither of those make him encyclopedic. One of those is also his own website, which is hardly a reliable source. I could start my own site and make all sorts of claims about myself too. -R. fiend 19:04, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete -- unless notability is verified. - Longhair | Talk 19:33, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Vanity. Jayjg (talk) 19:34, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Also needs to watch his weight. JFW | T@lk 19:48, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • If you post photos of yourself on the internet, you have to be able to tolerate this kind of remarks. Similarly, posting your biography on Wikipedia may lead to hurt feelings when you land on VFD. Do not criticise my character where it's your thirst for Wiki-fame (or that of your socks or pals) that has been driving this all along. JFW | T@lk 00:34, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, more Cantorcruft like the Eliezer article. RickK 20:01, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
    For people who are wondering what Rick is referring to, see Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Lawrence Eliezer Kepecs. By the way, we should soon expect the appearence of at least a half dozen sockpuppets voting "Keep" here, if not more. Jayjg (talk) 20:11, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    You called that one, Jayjg (see below). -R. fiend 20:50, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    There is also a WP:VFU for the third recreation of the Eliezer article. RickK 22:53, May 24, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Victor I. Beck is quite notable. He had a radio show for G-d's sake, and has performed all over the world. There are alot more important things out there than Pokemon and Sock puppet and Googly eyes, which you have articles about. It seems to me that this is now turning into a discrimination case. Reinstate Cantor Victor Beck, and Cantor Eliezer Kepecs. --Professor Kaufman 20:44, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I wrote this article. It was not your article, it was mine. I don't go around erasing your work. Everytime I write something, you turn around and erase it. I'm getting sick of this.--Vvictor 20:47, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. This is deja vu all over again. There was a VfD just the other day on another cantor who met the pope. Quale 21:06, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    I suspect the creator of this and related articles plans to create articles on all 141 Jews who visited the Pope that day. He's up to 6 articles already, one on the event, one on the room it was held in, and 4 on participants. Jayjg (talk) 21:24, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • No, the creators of the articles had in mind 2 or 3 people. Thats it!!! Keep--Merlinzor 21:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Merlinzor (talk · contribs)'s edits are all to related articles. Jayjg (talk) 21:43, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's funny how you would know what the creators of the articles had in mind. In any event, since you have already created articles on 4 people, your statement is obviously false. Jayjg (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oh, I distinctly recall the socketteer saying that the ultimate goal was to create articles for all 141. If I have time today, I'll try to dig it up... Tomer TALK 19:37, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Deja-vu indeed. 21:22, 24 May 2005 (UTC) Forgot to sign this (cheers Jayjg) Leithp 15:58, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • keep --Kookoo 21:30, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • No vote. I was going to vote keep, but I think not, now. As for the weight comments, they really aren't fair, but then, nobody's character is perfect. Scimitar 21:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Vanity, and stop with the sockpuppets, please.--Mrfixter 22:43, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not sufficiently notable. Jacob1207 23:44, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I don't see how keeping it will hurt anything. Dr. D 00:12, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Note: Dr. D (talk · contribs)'s 9th edit; user began on 5/24; all edits to VfD's and user page.
  • Delete. Possibly even less notable than Képecs. In any case, the article as it currently stands is a vanity piece. If there's ever a WikiChazan, I'm hoping the way it's presently written wouldn't even pass muster there. Tomer TALK 00:18, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep--Senator 14:15, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, soon, before they spread. —Ben Brockert (42) UE News 00:59, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

--Cantor Victor Beck 02:39, 25 May 2005 (UTC)===Discussion=== Let's set the record straight shall we? 1) This is not a vanity article. I didn't even know that it existed till someone sent me the url to see it. 2) I've just opened an account here for the first time a few minutes ago. 3) If you really intend to do research, then you need to expand your horizons beyond the confines of Google. For example, you might try checking with the U.S. Library of Congress. There you would find copies of all the original music that I have written, plus all of my recordings. You would also find Airchecks (recordings) of all the "ASK THE RABBI" radio shows. All of this material was submitted to the Library of Congress for Copywrite protection. The Library of Congress accepted, and Copywrites were issued for all of the materials I submitted. You could also check the archives of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum for my song "NEVER FORGET ME". You will find not only the music, but my recording done with a 40 piece orchestra, as well as the story of how the song came to be written. I am afraid that if you validate the world around you only by what you can find on Google, then you are doing yourself a great dis-service.[reply]

Please Note that I will not presume to enter a vote.

--Cantor Victor Beck 20:35, 24 May 2005 (UTC)Cantor Victor I. Beck[reply]

Wow, you seem awfully similar to the Cantor Victor I. Beck who made these edits 162.83.159.221 (talk · contribs). And the IP number is awfully close to these other anonymous editors 162.84.137.253 (talk · contribs) 162.83.130.189 (talk · contribs) 162.83.168.194 (talk · contribs) who've been editing these articles (including the now deleted Lawrence Eliezer Kepecs one), perhaps because they're all Verizon New York City dialup IPs. Maybe that's all a big coincidence. Jayjg (talk) 20:36, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As you say, it is quite a coincidence, especially since I do not live in N.Y.C. nor do I have a dial up service. I do however have Verizon. That is where it ends. And as far as the good doctor is concerned, 1) my weight is non of his concern, and shall we assume by his snide remark that he is physically PERFECT? We know that his character is not.--Cantor Victor Beck 21:02, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sockpuppets, you do not help your master's cause. Be quiet. Dunc|☺ 21:03, 24 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

As I recall, Reverend Cantor Victor I. Beck voted "Keep" in the same hysterical manner as all the other sockpuppets in the Very Reverend Cantor Lawrence Eliezer Képecs VfD. Was that a different Reverend Cantor? Was he lying when he signed as you, O Most Highly Notable Very Good Singer Reverend Cantor Victor I. Beck? Or are you lying now when you say that you "just opened an account here for the first time a few minutes ago"? As I recall, I went to the Very Reverend Cantor Beck's website and got his email address and phone number, which I posted in the VfD discussion there. It should be a very small matter to go get that information once again, and this time to actually call the Most Highly Reverend Cantor and see what he has to say about this whole thing in person. I'm disgusted and appalled at the level of chutzpa you exhibit, O Dear High and Mighty Sockpuppet Maestro, and I suspect he would be as well. Tomer TALK 00:16, May 25, 2005 (UTC)

Let's again set the record straight and this is the final time that I will demean myself to stoop to your level. 1) I DO NOT LIE. NOT FOR YOU OR FOR ANYONE ELSE, AND CONSIDERING THAT YOU KNOW ABSOLUTELY NOTHING ABOUT ME YOU HAVE INCREADABLE GAUL TO MAKE SUCH AN ACCUSATION 2) You demonstrate the level of your ability and the value of your judgement regarding being an editor by the way that you attack and threaten me with your personal attacks on my privacy. You dare to blackmail me by threatening to publish my home contact information? If this is the kind of action that is condoned on Wikipedia then I think the world should be so informed of the lack of integrity in this online publication and it's editors. You are a disgrace to the publication and any honest people who may be involved. I can also assure you that I do not take kindly to threats and any actions will be dealt with in a definitive, strong, and forthright manner. Now would be the appropriate time for you to try and prove that you are not a sniveling coward hiding behind your screen image and offer a proper apology. --Cantor Victor Beck 02:39, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently, Dear Reverend Cantor, you fail to realize that if the VfU on Lawrence Eliezer Képecs is successful, this PUBLIC DOMAIN INFORMATION, which you erroneously believe to be "private", will also once again become public. If you'd read more carefully, you'd notice, I've ALREADY published this information, which I got DIRECTLY off the REAL Cantor Beck's (horribly designed) website, as I explicitly stated when I posted it the first time (along with citations). Your flailing attempts to impugn my character do nothing to establish your credibility, nor that of your master, Merlin. Tomer TALK 08:34, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
Oh...and I think you're looking for "incredible gall", not "increadible gaul" (ink-readible french perhaps?). (Why you wouldn't just use a perfectly good word like "chutzpa" is beyond me, unless as some have surmised previously, you're not even Jewish...) "It's" is a contraction for "it is" or "it has", the possessive form of "it" is simply "its". Demeaning yourself and stooping to my level, even if it were somehow possible to "stoop" up to my elevated level, are the same thing. Nothing is served by repetitive tautological redundancy. Publishing public-domain information in public hardly qualifies as "blackmail", look it up here. Wikipedia is not a publication as such, and even if it were, you, as a purported editor do far more to lower its standards than I have ever done, even at my drunken worst. I have not threatened you, nor am I interested in leveling threats against you. As a sockpuppet, you don't have a leg to stand on, and so you're clearly at a disadvantage, since I have two. Not to mention two hands and a functioning washing-machine. (AND SOAP!) As I have no screen image, I don't see how I can be charged with hiding behind it, but I sincerely think perhaps you should consider the wikipedia policy Wikipedia:No personal attacks before you call me a "sniveling coward". Until such time as I do something requiring an apology, however, I recommend you not hold your breath, as none will be forthcoming. As for your apparent illiteracy, as I recommended in the Képecs VfD discussion, you might do well to get a different box of crackerjacks. Tomer TALK 08:54, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
P.S....apologies to everyone else, but fanning the flames on this one was too much fun to pass up... -t Tomer TALK
Incidentally, in case anyone is interested in following up on this with the real Cantor Beck, his email address, freely available at [4], is cantorbeck@cantorbeck.com. I took the time to check out whitepages.com and see what they had in Tucson, Arizona for a V. Beck, and lo and behold, guess what I found [5]! That's right!
V. Beck
Tucson, AZ 85749-7142
(520) 760-3821
So, who wants to call him? Tomer TALK 09:08, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
Hmmm...Am I drunk, or is it just incredibly strange that Cantor Beck, a resident of Tucson, Arizona, has dialup Verizon service in New York??? Tomer TALK 09:10, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • I would like to request that the supporters of this article edit this article to more clearly establish that Cantor Beck is notable. Hosting a nationally syndicated radio show might qualify, but more information about that should be provided. No vote yet. --Metropolitan90 03:44, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Just in case you really are interested the radio show "Ask The Rabbi" was heard in 17 broadcast markets around the country every Sunday morning by approximately 3/4 of a million listeners. Among those markets was New York, Baltimore, Chicago, Boston, Orlando, Phoenix, Los Angeles and Seattle. We were also heard by approximately 28,000 listeners on the internet. At that time internet broadcasting was a brand new technology. I do not need to validate my life to anyone. I am quite comfortable knowing the work that I have accomplished, and that I have been priviledged to have had the opportunity to have a profoundly positive effect on the lives of a great many people. If I were to accomplish nothing else of note the rest of my life I can be content with what I have done.--Cantor Victor Beck 04:38, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's a good attitude. Keep in mind, this is just Wikipedia, your real life is far more important. Put this behind you and move on. Jayjg (talk) 04:49, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, nonnotable. But Scimitar, since when is being overweight a sign of poor character? I don't trust men with a lean and hungry look... --Angr/comhrá 06:23, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • <chuckle> Uncle G 13:36, 2005 May 25 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable, vanity. Megan1967 06:27, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I am a singer myself who helped contribute to this article, though I admit my voice is not as good as these three cantors. What does it hurt you so much to keep it? I liked Kepecs' article and Krupp's equally as much. It shows what professional cantors are really involved with, besides being "prayer leaders". They are typically involved with community events, charitable causes, helping others, teachers, and trying to help the world reach a higher spiritual level at the same time. The whole purpose of the trip to Rome was to build bridges between many fighting factions. The orthodox condemn the conservatives and reform in Judaism, and vice versa, and in the past there was not such a good relationship with the Vatican, as there is now. This trip brought everyone together for a common cause. It was so powerful an event. Cantor Beck, Cantor Kepecs, Gary Krupp, and Cantor Barnoy were essential figures in trying to bring about world peace. Do you know what that is?? It's a noble cause, and should not be condemned, but rewarded. I wish we had more people in this world like these three superior cantors and the Commandatore who "make good things happen" in the world we live in. And I am not a sockpuppet. You apparently have an article about him so I guess he is more notable in your book than any of the aforementioned cantors. Ask yourselves, do you want the world to be a better place, or a worse place. --Rigoletto1 12:04, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: Rigoletto1 (talk · contribs)'s 13th edit, all to related articles/VfDs. Jayjg (talk) 15:42, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • You apparently fail to grasp what is going on here. Wikipedia is not a biographical catalog of everyone who has ever tried to do anything any- and everywhere. Nobody is either condemning nor demeaning these men's trip to the Vatican, nor is anyone saying that they shouldn't be rewarded. A vanity article in WP, however, is not a reward, it's a violation of Wikipedia's biographical articles policy. As for the orthodox condemning the conservative and reform and vice versa, not only is this a caricature, but utterly irrelevant to either this discussion or to the article. BTW...I don't think the world is going to be "a worse place" if this article is deleted, and I think if you think about it for a split second, neither do you. Tomer TALK 14:55, May 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP I think its good.--Cantors 14:02, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Found biography here. NN JiFish 01:04, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • KEEP I am a student at the seminary where Cantor Beck and Cantor Kepecs are teachers and on the Board of Directors. The seminary is in New York - and yes, it is the same Cantor Beck who has a place of residence in Arizona - and yes, is possible for someone to have 2 residences. I am not sure why there is any confusion as to if it is the same Cantor Victor Beck. I am a bit confused as to why anyone would mention that the article on him violates any rules of this site as when I went to examine the rules of biographies it clearly states that biographies can be included if they meet the criteria of: "Painters, sculptors, architects, engineers, and other professionals whose work is recognized as exceptional and likely to become a part of the enduring historical record of that field Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events" Wikipedia's biographical articles policy Cantor Beck is a person who achieved renown and notoriety for his involvement in the seminary, his trip to Rome, MOST OF ALL - his outstanding and remarkable career. He is also recognized as an exceptional Cantor who will most certainly become a part of the enduring history of his field. The same can be said of Cantor Kepecs whose artwork is respected and appreciated. As far as the trip to Rome, I don't understand why the urge to delete this "newsworthy" event. It was reported on CNN, NBC, CBS, Newsday, The New York Times, and the official Vatican Website - just to name a few. I don't think that any of these media sources would carry anything un-newsworthy. On another note - the IP addresses can be similar if they are set up to the same modem. As this is a school, we are all connected to the same network.--Rabbi2b 15:32, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: This user has made No contributions. Possible Sock Puppet? --JiFish 16:01, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
      • Newsworthy is not synonymous with noteworthy. And Most Highly Reverend Cantor Victor I. Beck, what ever are you doing at this "school"?! If you're so great, surely you're too busy to be spending your time at school with the rabbi in apartment 2B. Hard times? Tomer TALK 21:30, May 26, 2005 (UTC)

All of you negative people who claim to be editors, are just too damn full of yourselves. What gives you the right to talk about somebody like this? You should be ashamed of yourselves. Did you ever hear of the adage, if you have nothing nice to say don't say it at all? From what it looks like, I'll guess not. Please note that I'm not voting. (unsigned comment by 64.12.116.134)

    • That's Okay, anonymous votes don't count anyway. --JiFish 19:54, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Seems non-notable to me. I couldn't find anything, and just to be sure we're clear... I made an effort to search the Library of Congress as was suggested above. Too bad it's not Victor Emanuel Beck from the 1890s... then it might be notable. SirGeneral 21:48, 26 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non notable. JamesBurns 10:51, 27 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete along with Ofer Barnoy and User:Cantors userpage, which is a clear misuse of Wikipedia. Vanity articles are not allowed. Period. Also, I highly recommend a new rule that would require people with at least a minimal number of edits to vote on this page, so as to avoid all these ridiculous sock puppets. Danny 15:55, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Obvious attempt to use Wikipedia for self-promotion. That's what GeoCities is for. Googie Man 17:06, 30 May, 2005. (UTC).
This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Victor_Beck&oldid=1051102913"