Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Charles-Lemaire


 * 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. Sock-infested mess, and the article is a blatant advertisement. Guy (Help!) 20:31, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Benjamin Charles-Lemaire

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This deletion suggestion has been created by another editor. I am converting a speedy deletion tag into an AfD tag to allow discussion about the arguments. This seems to be more productive than starting an edit-war about this.

Original message was:

Edits:
 * 00:31, 29 April 2018‎ ‎ . . (23,391 bytes) (+23,207)‎ . . (Please wait a moment, I'll create an AfD thread for you instead. We will then discuss about your arguments. Please wait a moment.) (rollback: 1 edit | undo) (Tag: Undo)
 * 23:51, 28 April 2018‎ (changed account name to ) m . . (184 bytes) (-23,207)‎ . . (Undid revision 838733336 by Javert2113 (talk)slight eligibility, controversial content on legal issues, does not meet the eligibility requirements on WP FR/ Wikiplus... Delete recognized blogger Stop it now!) (undo | thank) (Tags: Replaced, Undo)
 * 23:50, 28 April 2018‎ ‎ m . . (23,391 bytes) (+23,207)‎ . . (Reverted 1 edit by John doe123456987 (talk) to last revision by Shellwood. (TW)) (undo | thank) (Tag: Undo)
 * 23:45, 28 April 2018‎ (changed account name to ) (talk | contribs)‎ m . . (184 bytes) (-23,207)‎ . . (Undid revision 838732816 by Shellwood (talk)the same person for self-promotion, Fake) (undo | thank) (Tags: Replaced, Undo)
 * 23:44, 28 April 2018‎ ‎ m . . (23,391 bytes) (+23,207)‎ . . (Reverted edits by John_doe123456987 (talk) (HG) (3.1.22)) (undo | thank) (Tags: Huggle, Rollback)
 * 23:43, 28 April 2018‎ (changed account name to ) (talk | contribs)‎ . . (184 bytes) (-23,207)‎ . . (Undid revision 838732672 by ClueBot NG (talk)) (undo | thank) (Tags: Replaced, Undo, reverting anti-vandal bot)
 * 23:42, 28 April 2018‎ ‎ m . . (23,391 bytes) (+23,207)‎ . . (Reverting possible vandalism by John doe123456987 to version by 77.136.87.109. Report False Positive? Thanks, ClueBot NG. (3363014) (Bot)) (undo) (Tag: Rollback)
 * 23:42, 28 April 2018‎ (changed account name to )‎ m . . (184 bytes) (-23,207)‎ . . (slight eligibility, controversial content on legal issues, does not meet the eligibility requirements on WP FR/ Wikiplus World etc. IP: the same person for self-promotion!!) (undo | thank) (Tag: Replaced)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Benjamin_Charles-Lemaire&action=history ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:34, 29 April 2018 (UTC)

Comment: The AfD on the french wikipedia is here. The article was salted there after 2 unsuccessful deletion reviews. Regards, Comte0 (talk) 17:51, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Oh, thank you very much for the research. Adding a comment up here as well: Articles_for_deletion/Benjamin_Lemaire ~ ToBeFree (talk) 19:31, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Neutral ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:37, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete ~ Djumbo75 (Djumbo75 (talk) 00:40, 29 April 2018 (UTC)) This person is self-promoting, has changed these names several times to see "nickname" and create his page on all wikipedia of the world, in France he has not met the conditions and has been withdrawn in recent years and on http://plus.wikimonde.com/wiki/Benjamin_Lemaire (an administrator deleted it last night for lack of eligibility and problems of all kinds), it seems to me that it should also be deleted here for obvious lack of notability. Best Regards
 * Comment: The link is pointing to Wikimonde Plus, which appears to be a separate project and not simply a mirror. However, what Djumbo75 said is true for the French Wikipedia article too: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Lemaire (view page logs) ~ ToBeFree (talk) 02:44, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Wikimonde Plus is not a separate project, please look at many pages, it's just a mirror where people can interact, and this parcular page was on war editing before of this specific user, and admin deleted because of its ware edition, fake accounts not becasue of eligility (it's written in it's log) Tifftiff1234 (talk) 11:16, 29 April 2018 (UTC) *FALSE: The real reason for the deletion on the other WPs: "Deleted the page Benjamin Lemaire (too many problems: promotion problems, deletions of sources, slight eligibility) <= it arranges in its way apparently it is well indicated black on white" questionable eligibility and promotion, etc.


 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:19, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:19, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Neutral Users participing here (Djumbo75 and JohnDoe) were created to delete this article. They did exactly the same things on Wikimonde and on Wikipedia IT and DE. There is no legal issue because there point on vue are based on non confirmed sources about a justice decision. And even if the decisions were true, the fact that so little news is commentated on national media prove that the person has a real existence. Please be aware that there's a vendetta campaign against this person and Wikipedia is not a way to settle accounts. Page as deleted to French wikipedia after admin get enough of fake acounts everywhere and users are trying to to same things here. Plus, Wikipedia eligility are not often same. Here nothing is promotional (and if it, just add banner, and let's correct that) but neutral. And even if most of sources are social media/websites to prove that content or nominations exists, there are national centred sources Slate, TeleStar, Gala, 20 Minutes). User here is trying to make rumor a legal issue but it's not... There'are clear rules here. So :
 * controversial content on legal issues : no issue here
 * does not meet the eligibility requirements on WP FR/ Wikiplus World : WikiPlus said they deleted because of war edition only, WP FR deleted after a vote of many fake (and it was before most of sources here, and eligity are not same on all WP)
 * the same person for self-promotion!! : there are no IP, and no multiple account here...

Tifftiff1234 (talk) 10:58, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Bcoz: you are a liar saying that I am a fake nose and I did absolutely nothing about the other WPs just reported what I saw! You are the only contributor of all these articles on all wikipedia... There has been a consensus that has ended with administrators, we are not talking about justice cases(??), but about its admissibility that you do not want to recognize by doing your promotion, you are a great French director? No, an actor? No! Just an artistic agent and a blogger so for you gives her the right to be there? In addition, I am for nothing at all for the removal on the wiki IT, FR, DE ??? and what you say is totally wrong, there is no vendetta! You are the one and only person who writes this article. No one else is a contributor.. I did not create to delete the article but to have a notice of eligibility, if it remains so much better for you. I have only one account otherwise if you know how to read I just ask an administrator to change my account name! I only have one and I contribute only with this one. The other users that you denounce against you are not even me, I just reported facts like two other people here in discussion by tapping on Google. For me, you are promoting, bloggers I know and assist artists but are not on WP and have been deleted for lack of notoriety. You are of a great renown in France is the real question? Answer: NO to me. Thank you for your opinion and stop with your false insinuations. Judge in your conscience, thank you! (Djumbo75 (talk) 12:20, 29 April 2018 (UTC))


 * PS: The real reason for the deletion on the other WPs: "Deleted the page Benjamin Lemaire (too many problems: promotion problems, deletions of sources, slight eligibility) <= it arranges in its way apparently it is well indicated black on white" questionable eligibility and promotion, etc. The rules are clear on slight eligibility ! (Djumbo75 (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2018 (UTC))
 * Please do not vote twice. And you're not allowed to vote because you just arrived on Wikipedia btw. I'm not the only contributors, because the draft was there : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Benjamin_Lemaire. Just look at the history, there are dozen contributors before and after me. And please we're not here to judge personal thing, and people work, but only is there are sources or not. And here, there are. What happned on other website in not the question here. And the reasons you gave is bad translated but every one can consult it and see it's false (and btw, the history show clearly that you've been blocked for using 4 accounts (http://plus.wikimonde.com/wiki/Benjamin_Lemaire), what you did here before someone noticed it ;) What everyone can see is : why does some without any contributions in Fr, En and WikiMonde, is suddenly taking care of deleting everything about someone. So please let the community debating, and if it's too promotional, feel free to edit and rewrite, that's the way it works. I voted neutral because I'm to new to vote, and creator of the article. You should do the same, not voting 2 times :) 77.136.17.168 (talk) 13:17, 29 April 2018 (UTC) - Sorry wasn't logged, but as you can see, my IP wasn't use to edit anything else. Tifftiff1234 (talk) 13:18, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Deleted: --Royalhouse (talk) 13:42, 29 April 2018 (UTC) same opinion lack of notability, a single contributor (using 2/4 acc). I would agree with your assessment: lack of notability. Google turns up no reliable sources on him => Comment: Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Benjamin Lemaire. There are a lot of sources here, but few of them appear to be independent and reliable – all the facebook/IMDb/YouTube/google/blog stuff does nothing to establish notability, but does give a strong impression that someone with a conflict of interest is trying to use Wikipedia to promote this person. Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:15, 26 April 2018 (UTC) CheckUser note: The following accounts are sock puppets: Liloula2200, IamAGecko, Ninobalto222, and MangoZona. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IamAGecko.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:01, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

Note Given this new information, I would like to highlight (apart from the fact that only the puppets seem to be ok with keeping the article) that 95% of the contribution to this article were made by these sock puppets, given a good information on its unreliability as well as its not notableness. Giorgio69 (talk) 18:23, 14 December 2017 (UTC) --Royalhouse (talk) 13:56, 29 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I worked on draft on IP, but it seems that anybody can create an account and vote so I vote, even it'es clear that the two "deleted vote" are from the same person. There're many primary sources, but also secondary like Slate or 20 Minutes. 1 movie out in theaters (that could be eligible), and a short movie shown and awarded in 2 A class festival that could be eligible (note that it should have 2 short eligible to be eligible to). So it's ok for me, and it's evident here that the people who ask the deletion has COI. Martingally (talk) 14:25, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
 * shock puppets : Go ahead and continue working on it, you left other puppets of shock? You will set an example as it is easy to create a new account! I am on WP since 2005 in Canada, France, US for more than 3 years(2015) n you, today? Class festival n Nikon short film no eligible!! It's not forbidden to get paid to influence a Wikipedia article, you just have to declare it! Not with a mention discreet report but visible at the top of the article as in the clipboard!--Royalhouse (talk) 15:05, 29 April 2018 (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.