Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Claud "Rick" Koerber


 * 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. Mr.  Z- man  03:55, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

Claud "Rick" Koerber

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article about a non-notable "businessman" (scam artist depending on your information) that is written in a distinctly promotional tone. Multiple article claims are unverifiable with the provided references. Article was written by a user who appears to have a vested interest in the subject and his company, which the user has also created four articles about (which were all deleted); possible, if not probable conflict of interest. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 14:45, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as nom. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 14:47, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I’ve been doing research on Rick Koerber and his company FranklinSquires and want to post my findings on Wikipedia. My attempt to create four pages about FranklinSquires was my attempt for people to easily find this page whether they searched “FranklinSquires” “franklinsquires” or “FranklinSquires Companies, LLC.” I also recreated the page “franklinsquires” after it was deleted. My attempt to recreate this page was not to circumvent Wikipedia’s efforts to monitor articles. It was an attempt to comply with their suggestions. I made a few changes to the page and then created it (hence having created four pages about the company) again thinking I had resolved its issues. I am new to Wikipedia and am trying to learn its rules. I’ve also been trying to fix the problems with the Claud “Rick” Koerber page, which I created. I have made substantial changes and do not think it now merits deletion.Bumblebee91 (talk) 21:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC) — Bumblebee91 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Having three presidential candidates for 2008 (Rudy Giuliani, Ron Paul and Alan Keyes) accept Koerber's meeting invitations constitutes a notable person. Referenced by Keyes and Paul on their websites and the factual pictures of Koerber and Giuliani constitutes credible references of his notability.Bumblebee91 17:53, 3 December 2007 (UTC) — Bumblebee91 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * No, it doesn't, actually. According to WP:BIO: "Non valid general criteria: That a person has a relationship with a well-known person is not a reason for a standalone article; see Relationships do not transfer notability."  Review WP:BIO for the full list of criteria that make a person notable. Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 21:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mailer Diablo 12:48, 4 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I have researched other biographies on Wikipedia and have found many that do not comply with one or more of Wikipedia’s official policy regarding biographies. Rather than having these pages considered for deletion, they have a tag identifying its weakness (i.e. no references, promotional in tone, neutrality dispute, etc.). A few specific examples include 1) Jonathan Kramm, 2) Patrick De Mare 3) Patrick Coye 4) James (Sunny Jim) White 5) James "Rocky" Robinson 6) Benjamin Cavell 7) Benjamin Lascelles 8) Benjamin I. Mitchell 9) Benjamin Kotch and 10) Benjamin Katiyo. If other editors tagged these pages but did not deem them worthy of deletion from Wikipedia, why is the Rick Koerber page deemed for deletion instead of tagging its weaknesses?Bumblebee91 19:21, 4 December 2007 (UTC) — Bumblebee91 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Bumblebee91, you should really take a look at Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, as you seem to be bringing many of them up. The particular one that you just brought up in the above paragraph is called "What about article x?"  Ioeth (talk contribs friendly) 20:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or stubbify. After stripping off the fat, we'll have an article on someone who may just be notable. Chase me ladies, I&#39;m the Cavalry (talk) 21:28, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete the only thing potentially interesting is some unsourced BLP about possible security violations. DGG (talk) 09:08, 9 December 2007 (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.