Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Authors

This is a list of transcluded VfD debates involving articles about authors.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. – malathion ^talk 07:02, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jane Rumsfeld

I can find trace of this person, nor her novels (there are novels with these titles, but the plots are completely different, and they're not by Jane Rumsfeld — whatever mysterious pseudonym she's supposed to write under). Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:03, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — to make things clear. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:03, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless psuedonym can be clarified, inconsistencies resolved, and notability established in a re-write. Tobycat 17:06, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete exactly as Tobycat says. Tonywalton 19:23, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unverified. --Etacar11 00:00, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I tried my best to find any basis for this and found nothing to make me think this was real. Rx StrangeLove 00:37, 9 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. - Sikon 11:21, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Ralph E. Hayes Jr.

Delete - while I have no (urgent) issues with his linked webcomics having a wikipedia article, I definitely don't feel that every webcomic artist should also have their own personal page where they mention that they're "available for commission" and such. Sherurcij 05:14, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

Keep, if he's authored three notable webcomics. Kappa 05:27, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, per Kappa's arguments. Perhaps the line about commissions should be left out. Wikipedia is not a place for advertisements. Mistercow 05:46, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, I took that line out. Kappa 12:10, 6 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, unless we are imminently running out of resources to be an encyclopedia. —RaD Man (talk) 09:57, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, based on being an author/artist of 2 or more notable works with separate wikipedia articles as long as it remains "neutral".Ann Vole 01:01, 10 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 ^talk 15:28, August 13, 2005 (UTC)

"William John Hagan"

Vanity Page Lcuff 02:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: NN/Vanity. --Ragib 02:49, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Also, appears to be a cut and paste from his blog, for which copyright status is unknown. I assume that subject is the author, which brings up questions about notability. --Alan Au 04:03, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Userfy. Same old same old. --Misterwindupbird 10:14, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: NN/Vanity. Tearlach 10:54, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete/Userfy vanity/cvcruft. --Etacar11 17:31, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: CV vanity, barbarously named (showing that the contributor didn't bother to read any articles). Geogre 18:56, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete NN/vanity/formatting yadda yadda. JDoorjam 19:51, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vanity page. --jonasaurus 21:20, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete -- vanity - Longhair | Talk 08:23, 7 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vanity page. --Apyule 07:28, 8 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. Essjay · Talk 09:05, August 11, 2005 (UTC)

Montgomery Maxton

Vanity, non-notable Chuck 00:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Vanity, not notable. Website listed has no Alexa rank at all! Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 00:25, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. The Google test yelded 11 results.
Delete. Mentioned in a The Enquirerer article about gay marriage. Still, non-notable. —Tokek 00:49, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
weak keep at least for now; Google hits are not only evidence of notability. I'd give editors a chance to add reference to published works, critiques, and so on. I have no access to literary notability, but others surely do, and I'd give it a chance. DavidH 01:04, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
- The VfD process gives them 5 days, that's usually enough for someone to come along and fix it if it is fixable. -Splash 02:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. No indicia of encyclopedic notability - "up and coming" doesn't quite cut it. -- BD2412 ^talk 01:14, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Delete per [[User:BD2412/deletion debates|BD2412]. -Splash 02:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Sorry -- looks like a nice website, though. The article will be welcomed back once he becomes a published poet. Pburka 03:07, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. NN, sounds more like a bio than anything. Karmafist 05:02, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, vanity. Tempshill 05:16, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete because it looks like a vanity page. --Martey 11:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Vanity. EdwinHJ | Talk 23:35, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, when the first google hit is the Deletion log... --Etacar11 23:51, 4 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Planet Zebeth and Kabutroid

This was nominated as below, but received no useful votes beyond the nomination. I am relisting it here for a further 5 days.Splash 19:09, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

There are a very small number of notable sprite comics. This is not one of them. Nifboy 22:24, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Edit - Added Kabutroid, its author. Nifboy 22:34, 29 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Disagreement - Would you like to know why it's not as widely known as, say... 8-bit theater? It's because I'm highly against spamming my readers with advertisements. Because I don't advertise on my site, nor do I myself ask advertisements to be posted on other sites, it won't be as well known as a site that spams it's existance into every orifice of the web. Remember... some things that don't spamvertise you constantly may not be all that bad. And given I have over 500 comics to date, I can safely say that this site is already doing better than many others out there. And an added note... given many of the major Metroid information databases link to me (Metroid Database, Metroid Source, Metroid Galaxy, several lesser-known ones) of their own free will, that should count for something. - Kabutroid — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.239.196.6 (talk • contribs) 12:18, 3 August 2005
Disagreement - You're right. Planet Zebeth is not a notable sprite comic, it's one of the damn best ones out there, and the only one worth my time to read. Admittedly, the first few strips did suck, but if you read past 100 at least they get pretty damn funny. Kabutroid is also one of the coolest people I've ever talked to. There are few who can compare with him on his juggling skills, also (Life, not eggs). He IS late with the updates sometimes, but if I were in his position, I'd be updating ONCE weekly, not three times. And I have virtually no life! So please withdraw your vote for deletion, as it has no logic behind it. Maybe some misdirected emotion concerning the author, but other than that I can't think of what you might have against the comic. Minion-34094 18:51, 02 August 2005 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.180.43.5 (talk • contribs) 20:52, 2 August 2005 (user's only edits are to this VfD page)

Disagreement - Basically everything Minion-34094 said. I am a big fan of Zebeth, and, although there are some great comics out there, this is one of the best. Hydragon 00:19 03 August 2005 (user's only edits are to this VfD page)

Disagreement - Gotta say, I'm a fan. I've got quite a few webcomics on my daily list, several of them sprite based, and Kabs does one of the best. The occasional late updates are the only downside i can think of, but then again, what comic doesn't have them? Kacy 8-3-2005 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.110.156.234 (talk • contribs) 02:46, 3 August 2005 (user's only edits are to this VfD page)

Delete. Non-notable. A reliably produced sprite comic that doesn't spam ads is still... non-notable. The sockpuppetry here, combined with the illogical argument of "it's a good comic, and I read it, and he updates regularly, therefore it's notable and encyclopedic" make me even more fixed in my vote. And by the way: "Disagreement" is not a vote! --FreelanceWizard 19:38, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Y'know, this kind of makes me doubt his commitment to not spamming the whole web with his comic. Delete. Meelar (talk) 19:55, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Delete for nonnotability as per above. --Several Times 20:45, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable. No Alexa ranking. --Carnildo 23:51, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, the sockpuppets convinced me. --Etacar11 01:02, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. (I forgot to vote when I relised this nomination, and I did not vote previously.) -Splash 01:45, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

KeepPart of the reason its on Wikipedia is so people CAN learn about it. I mean, thats one of the points on here, right? I'm Cyrus, from the Subsector on Planet Zebeth. I think Wikipedia is a wonderful site, and great for all kinds of "useless" but at the same time, "useful" information. So what its not as poppular as 8-bit? Its still a great comic none-the-less and should be known about.~Cyrus

Keep why the hell do we just delete him because you folks have never heard of him? Ive never heard of alexa, lets delete that article... but whoever wrote the article was not... neutral.

fluke 14:41, August 5, 2005 (EST)

User has a total of 12 edits --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep (since my first comment was disregarded as a vote to keep) I've never heard of most of the comic strips mentioned in Wikipedia. I guess we should submit to delete all of them then. For those asking to delete it... how often have you SEARCHED for a Metroid sprite comic? Guess what... Planet Zebeth is the largest, longest running one online. EDIT: Oh, and would you like to know WHY it doesn't have an Alexa rating? It used to. However, I'm in the midst of changing from kabutroid.com to zebeth.com. Because any mention I give of the site anywhere (such as a message board signature, etc) is now listed as Zebeth.com, Alexa has dropped it's status of kabutroid.com, since it's significantly less used now. When the conversion from kabutroid.com to zebeth.com is complete, and all sites linking to Planet Zebeth use zebeth.com, Alexa will once again list it with a rating. - Kabutroid (Unsigned vote by 205.239.196.6 (talk · contribs))

Keep With all the other things that few people care about that happens to be on Wikipedia, how is this non-notable? It's a webcomic that has a fanbase of over... let's see... 2000 people. Being in Wikipedia just means it's an easier way for fans to explain to their friends what Zebeth is about. And again, with everything else on this site, WHY SHULD YOU CARE ABOUT THIS ONE?! - Blackflame (Vote by 24.161.34.151) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep Dude.... Planet Zebeth has inspired hundreds of dorks to keep on being dorks. It's worth your time, and worth a spot on this site, so I want everyone here to stop being a tittybaby and give it a chance. If you haven't heard of it, Get your hairy nerd ass over there and read through 20 comics and then make a judgement. -Nasty Sputnik (Vote by 81.15.88.103) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep Guys, if you are saying it doesn't deserve an entry because no one knows about it, then do you think that the problem would be solved by taking this article down? C'mon guys, use your heads! The purpose of this site is for information! Give it a chance, check it out. It's one of the best sprite comics online. -Neon Ninja (Vote by 208.186.52.34) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep as mentioned above, why do you all want it gone purely because you've never heard of it? For all you know I could've never heard of, say, Albert Einstein. Should his entry be removed from here then? Seriously, just "non-notable" or "unknown" is not a good reason to remove it. Isn't this place to give explanations on things that aren't known very well? Removing something because it's unknown would pretty much defeat the whole purpose of this site. - L33ch (Vote by 62.166.169.20) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep As Kabs himself said, how many Metroid sprite comics have you actually *seen*? There aren't that many out there, and even fewer good ones. Few sprite comics, period, have run for as long as this one has. Have you checked ProjectComics? Zebeth is listed as #4 out of several hundred, and has consistently been in the top ten there. This despite the fact that the "vote" button on the home page is pretty well-hidden. The site gets nearly 2000 unique hits per day, and has accumulated over a million. I see no reason not to keep it. Indeed, I see no actual reason to *remove* it--there are lesser-known sprite comics that have their own entries in Wikipedia. Is Wikipedia really in *this* much need of pruning? I think not. MarsJenkar 19:25, 8 August 2005 (UTC)MarsJenkar[reply]

This vote is user's only edit --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep Jesus Christ. You people are saying to erase this because you haven't heard of it? You fucking dumbasses. Zebeth is one of the world's best Sprite Comics, and it has a enormous fanbase. You may not have heard of it, but it's still good!(unsigned vote by 71.247.57.45) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep A comic based on a massive fan base, that helps to feed said fanbase, thusly keeping it alive. I know many of the readers would not still be interesated in the games if it was not for this comic; This, I believe, makes it notable. Also, with it's wide range of characters, plot twists, sub-plots, etc. there needs to be a place for people who have never read it to keep track of what's going on, and for those who do to let the world know what it is. Again, I shall use Albert Einstein: During his lifetime, was he all that notable? No. For the most part, he was just a guy, doing what he had to to live. So, following that, how can you call something "non-notable" when it hasn;t been given the chance yet to become notable? (unsigned vote by 216.138.232.17) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep (My first vote wasn't counted, so I post one here) As one of Zebeth's many fans, I would kindly like ot mention that over 300 different fans have made comics in honor of Planet Zebeth and Kabutroid, with thousands more who haven't made comics. The comic is #5 on one of the Top Web Comics sites, and you think it's not noteworthy? Sheesh! -Hydragon

User has 3 edits, all to this VfD. --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep I like the comic, and I think everyone deserves a spot on wikipedia. Not to mention how easy it would be to post 20 keeps. (Unsigned vote by 65.12.52.28 (talk · contribs))
- I invite you to read WP:SOCK. --Etacar11 20:46, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Not that I expect you'll read it or heed it, but let me make a point here for the people who are no doubt being directed here from this web site. "Never heard of it" isn't (really) an issue for notability. Consider, instead, whether you think a sprite comic would end up in an encyclopedia. I suggest you read WP:NOT, remember also that Wikipedia is not a webguide, and consider a more appropriate place for this entry, such as Everything2. Chances are, if a researcher isn't likely to ever search for you, you aren't notable. Furthemore, unless you're the absolute exemplar of sprite comics, with a truly massive fan base (such as 8-bit Theatre) or significant age (Bob and George) and preferably both, you really don't belong, because a researcher would be looking for general information on sprite comics, not information on your comic in specific or information on Metroid sprite comics (and if they were, you should make your comic an external link from the Metroid page). In general, this means that sprite comics are, like Internet forums, personal web sites, and other such things, by default non-notable. You're making the claim for notability; back it up with some Alexa rankings that come close to or match the exemplars, provide something that is extremely important (for instance, "first sprite comic to be featured on CNN," "first sprite comic to be talked about in the media by a major public figure," or "first sprite comic to have a video game based on it, not the other way around"), or realize that you just don't fit in here. Subjective quality is not a concern in this vote, unless you can claim you were the first sprite comic to be discussed in a journal of literary criticism or the like. Yeah, I'm mergist/exclusionist -- especially where sockpuppets who delete their IP signatures are concerned. *shrug* --FreelanceWizard 20:34, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Kabutroid - Actually, I was the second Metroid comic strip to exist online. The FIRST one was about 10 comics long, and no longer exists online. And as well, I'm the largest, longest running Metroid comic strip in existance. Thusly, if anyone wanted to do any kind of research on Metroid or Metroid fans or the like, they would most likely want to know about Planet Zebeth. And above I gave explanations for the Alexa ranking. However, if NONE of those points count for anything, then I would be glad to just add a link from the Metroid wiki. Given you've said that this is data-based as opposed to vote based, I'll remove my request for people to vote. And I apologize if it appears I'm deleting an IP signature, but I have absolutely no clue how that even gets there to begin with. I'm clicking "edit page", and adding my comments.
- I didn't mean you when I was talking about deleting signatures. Some of the people who are coming here and voting are, however, doing so, and that shows bad faith (after all, if you stand by what you're saying, why wouldn't you want people to know who you are?). This vote is, I should note, not a democracy (I think WP:NOT describes that), but rather one in which a consensus among Wikipedians is sought with input from others. People from your web site who have never edited here before will, in all probability, have their votes ignored, and it will seem like bad faith on your part to actively drive people here (WP:SOCK). Anyway, I do want to mention something about Metroid fan research. I think a topic like Metroid fan phenomena might not be a bad article, given that it's one of the oldest game franchises around; I think similar ones for Mario Bros. and Sonic might not be bad topics either. A discussion of your site in such an article would be beneficial, but that's because it's part of a notable thing, but is not, IMHO, in and of itself notable. I can further support my argument in that regard by citing this page, where a common argument is that it's the "best" and longest running Metroid sprite comic. Are Metroid sprite comics notable on their own for that reason? I don't think so. However, are they notable as part of a discussion on the fan community of Metroid or sprite comics in general? Definitely. Admittedly, however, this is just my point of view, and there are others. The "vision" of what WP should be is not quite so clear as one might at first surmise. ;) --FreelanceWizard 22:26, 8 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep for reason given by MarsJenkar--El cid the hero 22:56, 8 August 2005 (GMT)

This vote constitutes all 3 edits by this user --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Keep Metroid-Star - Despite the fact that some people 'never heard of it,' Kabutroid and Planet Zebeth still exists and should be kept here. It has an enormous fanbase with numerous fancomics that are regularly updated. (Unsigned vote by 69.139.25.48) --Allen3 ^talk 22:17, August 8, 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:25, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Gu Long

Non-notable vanity. --BradBeattie 15:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete 21,500 Google hits [1] suggest notability, but it won't harm it to be deleted an re-written from scratch if that is the case. Sonic Mew | talk to me 16:46, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Keep. Has written two books, I think: [2], [3]. I can smell the germ of an article here. -Splash 19:45, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Very notable author of a major literary genre. I've just re-written the article, and even got a Taiwan Education Ministry (Global Chinese Language and Culture Center) webpage as a reference. Verifiable and encyclopedic. The Literate Engineer 21:19, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, and thank the editors who improved the article and helped to counter systemic bias. Kappa 23:54, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notable author. Well done Literate Engineer. Capitalistroadster 02:12, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Given the state of the article at the moment, I switch my vote to keep. --BradBeattie 02:29, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, clearly notable. Nandesuka 12:27, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, article is now good enough. Punkmorten 15:46, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Chinese page linked, translation pending. We can stop the discussionm now. SYSS Mouse 22:47, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. One of the major wuxia novelists who is not merely notable but extremely influential in the Chinese-speaking world. 165.21.154.112 03:59, 9 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Eugene van der Pijll 21:26, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Goodloe Byron (novelist)

Vanity? This guy doesn't seem to google well, but I guess he has published a couple books; I haven't determined if they're vanity presses or not. His sales ranks at amazon hover around 2,000,000 for one book and a wee bit better for another. Lots of redlinks here. -R. fiend 00:26, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Sales rank at about 2 million, doesn't sound very noticeable to me. Delete. --Titoxd 00:32, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep, needs serious cleanup. --Merovingian (t) (c) 11:37, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Weak delete, doesn't seem notable. --BradBeattie 14:47, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable--BirgitteSB 16:50, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Weak Delete I cleaned up the syntax inasmuch as I was able (the intended meaning was really not all that clear). The guy's grandfather appears to be fairly famous (put a mention there?), but no reviews after a year on Amazon for his second book. Eldereft 17:09, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable, and doesn't inherit any from his grandfather. -Splash 19:27, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, not notable. --Carnildo 23:00, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, he is published by a vanity press, PublishAmerica. Check out the Wash. Post article on that company. --Etacar11 01:37, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to grandfather, and mention. Septentrionalis 02:19, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn author. JamesBurns 04:34, 7 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:30, 9 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jessica Liese

Keep Jessica Liese is a well known writer and blogger in NYC, fools.
Non-notable vanity. Come back when you've found that fortune. Sonic Mew | talk to me 00:56, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Speedy Delete vanity --Bayyoc 01:08, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete You want mah dough. I say NO. -BrowardPIaya 03:03, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Agree it's a speedy, under the new criteria. Btw, check the new template {{nn-bio}} [4], and Wikipedia:Deletion of vanity articles <drini ☎> 04:48, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable, vanity. Alex.tan 05:05, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Speedy Delete non-notable and vanity. --W.marsh 06:34, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, non-notable vanity. — JIP | Talk 07:12, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Recuse for reason of personal association. The New York literary scene is probably the most vibrant and original in the world, due in part to people like Liese who nurture the growth and development of new writers. Nicemodernism is not a widespread term, but I cannot find a better one for the social phenomenon. Eldereft 17:15, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at the risk of our weltanschauung. Hamster Sandwich 17:25, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and punt "nicemodernism" to urbandictionary.com.
Delete as vanity. Hall Monitor 19:45, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete Clearly Vanity MicahMN | Talk 01:45, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Speedy Delete Definite vanity. And no picture to see if she is cute! And a phone number would be nice. . . FunkyChicken! 03:50, August 4, 2005 (UTC)
Delete Maybe if the Village Voice or some notoriety outside of her sphere on her were in the article, it'd be alright. As is, it's a nn-vanity. I assume the comment at the top is hers, maybe she needs to put some more niceness into nicemodernism...Karmafist 02:34, 5 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 07:50, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Alesha Webster

page appears to have been created by a one-time user about themselves, with no evident claims to notability. Material is more appropriate for a User page. Text also includes substantial advertorial content for a publication supposedly produced by this person. It's been flagged as PotentialVanity for about 2 weeks, the user has not added anything else in that time, so probably time to delete this. cjllw | TALK 06:02, 2005 August 3 (UTC)

Comment: This looks like a copyvio (I did a quick Google check, but no luck there), unless it's an ad and posted with permission. --MarkSweep 06:12, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Potential copyvio and magazine is yet to issue a single copy. No indication whether it will reach notability guidelines if and when it is published so its editor/publisher is not yet notable. Capitalistroadster 06:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable, as the magazine has not even been published yet. Thue | talk 08:40, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, vanity. --Merovingian (t) (c) 12:07, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Delete not speedy, as vanity/advertising --Henrygb 14:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Vanity. Hamster Sandwich 18:02, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete vanity/ad. --Etacar11 01:53, 4 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:38, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Kimberly West

Non-notable as far as I've been able to ascertain. No relevant Google hits. Tried for a speedy, but another user thought otherwise, so let's do this the formal way. - Lucky 6.9 16:15, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Google returns quite a few hits so there should have been an article generated automatically by sadgits (it's in google so it's important script). 212.101.64.4 16:18, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This vote might be referring to the article in question directly above. It popped up here while I was formatting this entry. - Lucky 6.9 16:21, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete non-notable, possible vanity -Soltak 16:36, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. looks like vanity to me. -R. fiend 19:27, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn vanity, can't even find the mentioned book on amazon. --Etacar11 02:15, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete non-notable. Both the book title, and the book publisher are not found on google. The google hits on the name return many un-related people. Eclipsed 23:04, 7 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:57, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Tom Panarese

The entire article is the sentence "Tom Panarese is a high school teacher who wrote a novel called "Sayville." Googling for "Tom Panarese" + Sayville returns 25 hits. The novel is legitimate (sold on Amazon), but I call this one non-notable. Delete. jglc | t | c 18:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete nn author. Y0u (Y0ur talk page) Delete since book was published by vanity press. (Y0ur contributions) 18:46, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Delete Amazon sales rank of ~800,000 convinced me of non-notability. My grandmother has a better ranking. ;) --Icelight 23:29, August 3, 2005 (UTC)
Delete nn, his book is published by a vanity press. --Etacar11 02:30, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
User:Tpanarese (Tom Panarese himself, I assume) left the following message on my user talk page:

I found it funny that someone else set up a Wiki page about me. Yes, I did write a novel entitled Sayville, but to be honest, there's no need for a Wiki page. It was started by someone who has been more or less a troll on Wikipedia anyway. So, thanks for adding it to the delete pile and feel free to delete as you wish. Tpanarese 19:10, 4 August 2005 (UTC)

jglc | t | c 19:15, 4 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Nice that he's not taking it personally. Good for him. :) --Etacar11 19:24, 4 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!) 09:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Jeff provine

Given that he gets 110 google hits I doubt he is notable. The book is real, but doesn't seem to be very popular. Thue | talk 18:49, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Book ranks 1,023,000th on Amazon [5], and has received one review in 2 years. That one review is intriguing: it refers to a sequel already published, but Amazon lists only this title by this author. -Splash 19:55, 3 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Delete nn, another writer published by a vanity press [6]. --Etacar11 02:33, 4 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.