Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlo Dizon


 * 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   speedy delete. WP:CSD blatant hoax. JohnCD (talk) 19:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Carlo Dizon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This individual does not appear to meet notability criteria for biographies. The "references" are unclear and difficult to verify. A web search does not turn up anything to support article content. Many of the claims in this article are dubious (at best). He is claimed to be the head of Dept of Anesthesiology at UCSF Medical Center, but there does not appear to be any mention of him at any ucsf.edu webpage. The whole thing may be a hoax. This may also be a part of an organized effort to promote members of this family - see Errold John Dizon which is currently marked for speedy deletion (edit:just recently speedily deleted as a blatant hoax). Peacock (talk) 13:26, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  15:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. -- Cheers,  Riley   Huntley  15:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete There is no faculty member named Carlo Dizon at UCSF. Age 25 is very young to be a doctor, much less a specialist. Chairpersons of departments aren't hired right out of medical school. This article looks to be pure fantasy. Mark viking (talk) 17:15, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete as above - seems to be a pure hoax. Lukeno94 (talk) 18:30, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as hoax. I've tagged it appropriately, as none of the sources seem to actually exist. I've also noticed that there are two specific accounts working on the article, leading me to wonder if this is a case of two people working to create hoax articles on Wikipedia or if it's one person working with a sockpuppet for some reason. I've opened up a sockpuppet investigation to see if it's the case and if not, to take the next step to potentially getting them blocked from editing. One of the users has created another hoax article, so I don't think that they have anything particularly helpful to contribute.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 18:55, 15 November 2012 (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.