Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles A. Findley


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 22:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Charles A. Findley

 * – ( View AfD View log )

There is no evidence of notability for this BLP. Most of the sources are primary, and there is a great chance that User:Dr. Chuck is who the article is about. &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  essay  // 17:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - completely lacking any independent reliable sources, thus failing three big rules -- WP:V, WP:GNG, and WP:BLP. I conducted several online searches and found lots of self-published books, unreliable websites, a DAR for a Mrs. Charles A. Findley, etc. Zero Google scholar hits. Bearian (talk) 19:53, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. Such self-promotion does neither Wikipedia nor the subject any favours. --DanielRigal (talk) 20:56, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: Contributors here may also be interested in the related AfD at: Articles for deletion/Collaborative Networked Learning. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:14, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The references cited are not self-published by wikipedia definition--For that reason self-published media—whether books, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, blogs, personal pages on social networking sites, Internet forum postings, or tweets—are largely not acceptable. Self-published material may be acceptable when produced by an established expert on the topic of the article whose work in the relevant field has previously been published by reliable third-party publications. Self-published or questionable sources may be used as sources of information 1.the material is not unduly self-serving; 1.	it does not involve claims about third parties (such as people, organizations, or other entities); 2.	it does not involve claims about events not directly related to the subject; 3.	there is no reasonable doubt as to its authenticity; 4.	the article is not based primarily on such sources.

P.S. I have no knowledge of any connection between a Mrs. Charles A. Findley and the focus of this entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.31.62.40 (talk) 22:13, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete -- WP:NOTABILITY is not established; the sources given are almost all those written by the subject, who would not be a reliable source for his own notability. --Nat Gertler (talk) 00:38, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:35, 13 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Don't create articles about yourself.--Milowent • talkblp-r  00:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete and SALT: For the reasons listed above. WP:COI, WP:NOTSOAPBOX, WP:NOTABILITY, WP:NOTMYSPACE, WP:NOR, etc. jheiv  talk  contribs 01:01, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete and SALT, extra crunchy, vide alta.--Kintetsubuffalo (talk) 13:03, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. -- Joaquin008  ( talk ) 17:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete and SALT. Wikipedia is not an index of résumés. —Lowellian (reply) 22:13, 18 March 2011 (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.