Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bass Pig


 * 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. --- Deville (Talk) 15:19, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Bass Pig
We have had vanity articles about people's pet animals. The title might suggest that this is one such but it is actually about the guy's sound system. Does not establish notability. -- RHaworth 02:59, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NEO and WP:RS. Crystallina 03:55, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - the author tagged for speedy delete under CSD G7, but then contested his own deletion! By the way, delete per above. MER-C 06:13, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Awesome sound system, but doesn't fit into WP. Delete per nom.   zephyr2k  23:35, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Esteban  F.  (contribs)  23:43, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Don’tDelete Please see the discussion page associated with the article. Markweiss
 * Keep Notable audio setup with 30 year history. SchmuckyTheCat 20:49, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Article 1) provides an audio reproduction application example in a non-commercial setting and 2) is a informational springboard for interested persons. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Pat Cook (talk • contribs).
 * Delete The speedy delete incident is explained by someone trolling the article's author at Talk:Bass Pig, but we can be pretty sure that the author didn't want to have the article speedily deleted. Anyway, I can't see any sign of third-party reporting on this. It is very hard to Wikipedia articles to be neutral (an absolute requirement) if they are written by people involved with the subject (this is why we have a guideline suggesting that it may be a problem if you write about yourself or your friends). For that reason we usually expect someone else, a reliable third-party source, to have written about things before Wikipedia has an article on them. Because that hasn't happened in this case I don't see how this article can be neutral as required. Angus McLellan (Talk) 16:01, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete no reliable sources, etc. The usual. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:50, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Hemmingsen 17:05, 7 October 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.