Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Del Zamora


 * 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. You asked for it you got it Toyota. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:13, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Del Zamora

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not a single reference in entire article. 95% content is provided by WP:COI user (User:Del Zamora). WP:BLP Srobak (talk) 07:26, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 09:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if the entire thing should be deleted, but most of the self-serving content could go - every bit part he's ever had. Interesting that he's left out his full name and age! Ravenscroft32 (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Userfy to me at User:MichaelQSchmidt/Del Zamora (sigh) so I might use a sandblaster on the thing. I looked at this actor's rather healthy career, and his having significant roles in multiple notable productions and am of the opinion that WP:ENT is met. Many spanish sources speak toward "Del Zamora", as do many English language sources, so I feel WP:GNG is met. That said, and the apparent COI of it being written by User:Del Zamora aside, I have rarely seen an article that is in such a poor state.  I would have suggested userfying it back to author, but the author has major COI and sadly does not (yet) have a grip on style, tone, formatting, or sourcing. I am willing to spend the requires hours in fixing this one, and will check with the nom before returning a corected version to mainspace. And Del... stop writing about yourself and go read WP:A Primer for newcomers and its related WP:Wikipedia is not about YOU.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:23, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I am Del Zamora. One more thing. I have a serious stalker, and I mean serious. You need to lock down my page, after you do the edit. She is sabotaging all sites that I am connected to, with nasty posts, etc. I would keep as good an eye on this article, as you are doing now. Reviewing articles. I'm cool with that. I realize that this is volunteer work, right? Okay. I need your help. I could write it like an unbiased without COI (getting the drift, see?), but I always think someone would think something was not right. So, any help. If you live in LA, I'll buy breakfast. Thanks. Del Zamora
 * Del, take another look at WP:PRIMER and WP:COI.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I am Del Zamora. I had no idea about this process. There is one writer, who said he would sandblast the article. That is okay with me. I am an actor, so our natural tendency is to not be objective. We always have to sell, sell, sell. I now understand your objective. Realize I am a working actor, however I only make an average of 15k per year (due to being a Latino actor, that is what we make, because the Anglos always take the lead Latino roles, leaving us the smaller roles, you complain about. Talk about fulfilling a prophecy. I have done quite a few lead roles in movies, however I never made much money. 15k average per year. I just bought a car, a couple of years ago. I have struggled and do this full time. I am a neophyte in the cyber world. To punish me for that is just cruel. How are poor people ever supposed to learn, if you delete every mistake? Correct the mistake. Inform, the way the 2nd individual did. I never knew where there were policies, or that there were COI policies. I saw some mistakes and omissions, and started contributing from there. Never read the policies, as I was told, to just post. So, now I know. I never had my own computer, until a couple of years ago, after I had a roommate. So, I am behind the curve on Wikipedia, Twitter, etc. I do not know the rules. I appreciate any help. I do take exception with the comments about my writing. I wrote this article as a pr piece. If you wish to see my professional writing, then search; "Frida's Story: Artistic Choice or Cultural Catastrophe?" - Los Angeles Times, August 10, 1992 & "Where are the Latinos in Film, TV?" - Los Angeles Times - May 20, 1996. Not just anyone writes for the Los Angeles times, twice. In any case, go ahead. Butcher it up. Do your thing. I will protest and so will the Latino community in the Southwest, if you delete the page. They will cry racism, and so will I. I have an extensive FB following, write for numerous papers beside the LA Times, and am considered a community leader in the Southwest of the USA. I vote on the Emmys. I have worked for 30 years in the biz. Why you would want to delete this account is beyond me. I did not set it up originally. It was set up by someone else. I do hope that you leave in the articles I wrote for the LA Times. Remember, there are no small roles, only small actors. And I might add small minds. Several hundred actors audition for each "small role". When you win the role, you don't think of it as small. But, I know how you think. If your not the lead actor, then you don't matter, right? That's why they shot the scene that took all day to shoot. That's why the scene was written, no matter how small. Because it does matter. It mattered when it was shot, and if it made it through the edit process, then it really mattered to the storytellers. 80% of what is shot, is left on the editing floor. But, you're not film makers, so how could you ever understand this. Not meaning to cut you down. Just returning the tough talk you give me, as contributor to the piece. I just had 3 Guest Star episodes in TRUE BLOOD on HBO. I think that alone warrants this article staying up. Do what you will, with the edit. I now understand that it is the people's article. Not mine. I really will appreciate it, if you kept it up. Deleting it, is not the answer for anyone. Thank you for your attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Del Zamora (talk • contribs) 05:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * As the fellow willing to "sandblast" the article, what I intend is to correct the formatting and style and provide the sourcing I have found through my reserach, and to (sorry) remove some of the content that reads more like a resume and less like an encyclopedia aticle. What will return will be decent. And while it may be gone temporarily, it will not be deleted per'se, but moved to a sub-page where I can work on it and improve it so it can return. As a southern California actor myself, I understand your perspective. As a volunteer editing Wikipedia for over three years, I understand what is required.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I am Del Zamora. One last thing. Once you have adjusted this article to your objective format, I will not contribute anymore to it. I had no idea, that was a COI. Now I do. I may submit a correction, if I see something wrong, or correct something this stalker might say. Other than that, I will never again contribute to Wikepedia. I hope this satisfies your blood lust, to delete this account. All you had to do, was check with a couple of keystrokes, like the other person did. Knee jerk reactions to delete should always be questioned, and if you are a contributor, and/or administrator, I find this request to delete this article, quite reckless. Investigate, before you request delete. Someone should keep tabs of these false, unfounded requests to delete accounts. How mean can a person be. Really? Okay. I promise not to soil your landscape ever again. I promise. Thank you.
 * We do not have a bloodlust. Del, if someone like your real life stalker vandalizes the article after its return, Wikipedia has processes in place to repair any damage. The reason it is up for deletion is because of its formatting and style, and those issues can be addressed. Please compare how it is writen to other similar articles. Youve left me a lot of work, but I AM willing to undertake the task.  And if in the future, you feel the article might benefit from additional information, and can offer the reliable sources to suport the addition, you need only ask someone like myself to check into it. And Del, you are always welcome to edit Wikipedia, just don't write about yourself.   Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 09:45, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much. Copy that. Will follow all of Wikipedia's policies. I am relieved that policies do exist. Thank you, thank you for your help. Sorry, I made such a mess for you to clean up. It will not happen again. I want to thank you for your patience, professionalism, and most of all, your help. Not signing the post now. Learning as I go. Nothing has to be repeated to me. Once, and I learn. I really appreciate it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Del Zamora (talk • contribs) 20:57, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * A couple basic quick notes about replying here: New comments are headed with a " * " which will "bullet" it. Responses are imdiately preceded with either a " ** " or " *: " which will indent it. Also, a user's comments should be signed. That is done automatically by adding four "tildes" after the final period (upper left corner of your keyboard), done as " ~ ", which will then "sign" your comment as "Del Zamora" and add a time and date stamp (as you see at the end of my own responses). And that no one else has responded pretty much means that others recognize my wishes to re-write your article, and I expect that in another couiple days it will moved to my workspace as requested above. The resulting article will not be as all encompassing as the one you wrote. And everything I do include must be verifiable in outside-of-Wikipedia reliable sources.  If you have evidence supporting the personal background listed in the article, or links to any articles that speak specificlly about you, please drop the list and links to me on my own talk page. And trust that I am myself quite aware of Wikipedia's concerns toward COI.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 03:48, 19 August 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.