Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben metelits


 * 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 userfied, clearly not mainspacve material. Guy (Help!) 23:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Ben metelits

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete as per WP:BIO. Though this article has just been created but still nominating it for deletion on good faith and it is not a WP:BITE at all. Person in this article in noway meet WP:BIO. I tried with Google search but didn't find a single substantial reference that supports his career as a filmmaker and scientist. Becoming a scientist for a 2nd year medical student sounds a bit weird though. Because of all those issues, it looks like a vanity article and nominating for deletion. --  Niaz  (Talk •  Contribs)  13:43, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

I am an author on a published article regarding the Molecular Genetics of Pigmentation (see http://www.mostgene.org/Brilliant.pdf). I am also in the Honors program at NYU where I "yes, do research AND attend medical school classes!" Most importantly though, is that I am working in a lab testing out my own invention for a brand new anti-hypertensive agent which, although no one knows about it now, I am planning on patenting within the year and selling to a biotech company for further development, testing, and FDA approval. As far as the filmmaker part, I include the term loosely to mean "one who makes films, even short ones on youtube.com." If that is not "notable" enough, I will remove it. Please let me know what other changes need to be made so that my article will not be deleted. Thanks! User:ben.metelits —Preceding comment was added at 13:52, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: With due respect to whatever you have done, I would like to draw your attention to some core policies of Wikipedia (WP). WP maintains strict guidelines for its articles about their existence. Those guidelines (to WP they are kind of constitution) are called policy. Who (a person) is notable to have an article and who is not, is clearly defined under two important policies WP:NOTE and WP:BIO. You may have a close look there. Unfortunately you have been proven non-notable for WP to have a standalone or partial article according to those policies. Wishing you all the best in your future life and we would love to contribute in your article when you'll become notable. Cheers. -- Niaz  (Talk •  Contribs)  18:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, so you are working on something. Big whoop. You are not notable. Plus, this is a COI now. The article of yours, IMHO, is not notable either. The site is not well known, and you are not a master in the field. Still non notable. Still Delete.Undeath (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)


 * And as for the film maker part. Youtube films DO NOT COUNT. They are non notable.Undeath (talk) 15:12, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, created for vandalism only. -- M P er el 15:14, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I would like to remind everyone to remain civil and polite. Even if someone's views are hopelessly biased, treat them with respect and courtesy, and refer to policy, sources and above all be fair. Jon513 (talk) 16:06, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is a perfect example of why we have speedy criteria for non-notable bios (A7).  Quietly deleting this would have been much less incivil to the article's creator as it could have been worked out on a talk page between one or two editors if the creator contested the speedy.  Now, an AfD record will always exist that says Ben metelits.  Sorry, Ben.  You may very well be notable enough someday for Wikipedia.  It hasn't happened yet.  In an effort to "stop the madness that is AfD", I'm adding a speedy tag to the article.  Cheers,   Keeper   |   76  16:17, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. That you MIGHT be famous one day doesn't mean that you're anywhere close now. --Calton | Talk 16:29, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete. Author admits that his research is not even known now, and nothing else in the article, save for a dubious suggestion that his action garnered national media attention (15 minutes of fame is not necessarily an automatic qualifier for notability), suggests any form of notability.  Also, per above, Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy applies. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 16:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. Go sign up to facebook for this sort of stuff. Nouse4aname (talk) 16:58, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Just not notable. Sorry. Bstone (talk) 17:38, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * delete - less notable than I am. --Rocksanddirt (talk) 20:34, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment--okay, so it's non-notable. Jeez, guys, be nice--some of you need to quit snapping the poor guy's head off! Talk about WP:BITE...writing an article about oneself is a perfectly-innocent n00b error, and calls for GUIDANCE, not vitriol.  None of you ever made a mistake when you started here? Gladys J Cortez 20:46, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
 * I agree wholeheartedly Gladys, which is why I tried to get this article speedied instead of AfD'ed. It brings the troutslap out of the public arena and into the talkpages of the deletor and the creator, ne'er to be seen... Keeper   |   76  20:51, 4 February 2008 (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.