Talk:Ferdinand Peper

Untitled
The article was reviewed and the unreviewed tag was removed. The recommendation is to expand the article further and add additional links. Luceyg (talk) 20:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Possible autobiography
This article on Ferdinand Peper was created and is often edited by a user named Repep (Peper reversed). The article reads like a condensed resume and is most likely created and edited by Peper himself. This is an abuse of the Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.38.96.187 (talk) 07:52, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * You're probably right. However  has been permanently blocked for sock puppetry, so there's nothing more to do there.  The article itself isn't great but it's far from the worst I have seen recently.  Jonathan A Jones (talk) 13:22, 9 September 2017 (UTC)
 * What makes him notable? -Roxy the dog. bark 18:02, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Not a lot. He's a competent enough researcher in his field, but nothing special.  Citation counts below the level we would normally consider as high enough for WP:PROF and he doesn't obviously meet any other criteria.  As a thorough going inclusionist I wouldn't actually AFD this article, but neither would I vote "keep" if somebody else did.  It doesn't reach the level of triviality to justify a PROD though. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * THX. I'm getting better at assessing things, but I think I may be a deletionist. -Roxy the dog. bark 18:44, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

It has been previously noted by another user, above, that the article is unquestionably auto-biographical. It was created by (now blocked), Peper in reverse, and almost exclusively edited by him. This certainly warrants the AUTO tag and there is also major suspicious of a COI, until it can be proven that the article has a NPOV. I request that deletion of the AUTO and COI be reversed. These have been deleted by without giving any justification here in the talk page. 118.12.45.75 (talk) 02:25, 20 December 2019 (UTC)
 * All that has happened is that you have been asked to discuss the matter here on the article talk page because another editor (not me) disagreed with your addition of the tags. So please make your case without further unwarranted accusations. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 07:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

@Jonathan A Jones - it was you who last removed the tags, without providing justification here on the talk page. You are currently the most recent editor of the page and I have not undone your revision. But could you please provide justification for removing the tags. Also, could you please specify what you mean by 'further unwarranted accusations'? Thank you in advance. 118.12.45.75 (talk) 07:53, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Please refer to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Autobiography for the correct use of the AB/Auto/Autobio tag. Thanks. 118.12.45.75 (talk) 08:00, 20 December 2019 (UTC)

Stub/delete
If the subject doesn't meet WP:SCHOLAR, then lets just WP:DELETE or WP:STUB this. As it is now, it's a resume that violates WP:BLP. --Ronz (talk) 17:15, 20 December 2019 (UTC)