Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dirk Laureyssens


 * 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. Dakota 00:05, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Dirk Laureyssens


Self-published cosmology researcher, fails WP:NOR (and probably WP:NOTABILITY and WP:COI too). Related AfDs/VfDs at Talk:Pelastration/Delete (from 2003) and Articles for deletion/Mehran Keshe. Demiurge 00:34, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete despite accomplishments such as 'In 1997 Laureyssens created more complex puzzles introducing as an extra two pentagon puzzle pieces. Now it was possible to make next to the cube also a pentagon box.' Maybe if he could figure out how to make a foam puzzle with four extra pieces I'd reconsider. Antonrojo 02:51, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Vaporize and salt. Once the OR (and possible baloney) has been deleted, about the only notability left is inventing a neat but not particulary notable puzzle and contributing to 3ivx (but there's no references for that). Like usual, people who put up this kind of hooey leave it uncategorized and unlinked so it stays as far under the under the deletion radar as possible. Tubezone 03:37, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete weird. Missvain 03:54, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I'm probably mistaken, but I don't think he's the inventor of Belgium. Rever e ndG 04:33, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete What is this? How did someone invent the Kingdom Of Belgium? This is a load of caca, apologies for language.  K yo cat  meow! 06:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, if you really want to get technical about it, Belgium really is an invention, but I doubt Dirk Laureyssens was around in 1830. I think that is just sloppy translation from French or Flemish. Tubezone 06:32, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Delete Mildly entertaining, but hardly Wikipedic. Stammer 08:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * An inventor of Belgium?! Is that to mean he is an inventor in Belgium, or one of the people who invented Belgium?  Either way, silliness aside, Delete per nom.  --Dennisthe2 08:53, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment If you translate an inventor from Belgium into French, it's un inventeur de Belgique, into Flemish Een uitvinder van België. Machine translate either back to English, both come out An inventor of Belgium Tubezone 14:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Ah, thanks for the pointer. Note, corrected some formatting.  --Dennisthe2 00:52, 20 November 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails notability. Inventor of Belgium? Sr13 09:04, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Anyone who has the gall to invent Belgium should be deleted (apologies to real Belgiums)  SkierRMH, 11:44, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak keep but bet rid of the cosmology stuff unless it's verifable (his association with it, not the stuff itself). Be nice. Nobody would suggest that The Pied Piper of Hamelin used a town instead of a flute. "An inventor of Belgium" is weird-looking to an Anglophone eye, agreed, but perfectly comprehensible. No WP:BIAS against people with English as not their first language, please. As for the Happy Cube I've got one of these and it makes me anything but happy, as I can't do the /expletive deleted/ thing. Tonywalton | Talk 13:02, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment It's pleasant to hear the sound of a civilised voice here. Stammer 14:28, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, it seems to me a lot of the Wikipedia "experts" don't accept reality. My puzzles are real and sold in many countries. And I had a lot of counterfeith too. I am an inventor and you can check more than 130 patent applications on databases on Internet. I have a lot of officially registered USA copyrights, starting from 1986. My puzzles were exhibited on the World Expo of 1992 in Sevilla and 1996 in Portugal in the Pavillions of Belgium. You need to have a very good product to be invited there by the Belgian authorities. But in fact: What is the problem? Mu6 23:49, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Half blatant advertising, half complete (and non-notable) bollocks. HEL 16:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * With apologies to the above contributors, and with some reluctance, I say Keep. Whilst the business with the holons and the cold fusion looks like crankiness, which I'd like to delete on the grounds that it's personal research and thus not appropriate to Wikipedia, I do think that this guy is notable as the inventor of the little foam-rubber cube puzzles. I've found a couple in Christmas crackers over the years, and they're neat little geometric puzzles - nothing like as interesting or important as Rubik's Cube, but worth noting nonetheless. His mistake in writing what I suspect is a self-publicising article was to put all the cranky stuff in. WMMartin 18:13, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. Many of the Dutch googles are about DGS, a compression technique he advertised 2001-2002. There was a lot of argument about that one, some said the claims were outrageous, and there was an authorship dispute. Neither of these is represented here, we only get a short sentence about his involvement in 3ivx. Something to hide? On average, the combination of having claimed that an entire film could be shown on a 16 Mb memory mobile phone, involvement in cold fusion and cosmology and the self advertisement here is enough to tip the balance. --Pan Gerwazy 03:00, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete: He's obviously NOT the inventor of Belgium, it doesn't say he is. That being said, it can be argued whether or not he's notable. In the Belgian wiki I might say weak keep, not here. --Wizardman 18:04, 24 November 2006 (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.