Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Howdershelt

Ed Howdershelt was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. 7 votes to delete, 1 vote to keep. Postdlf 03:47, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Ed Howdershelt
Another deadender. This article states, pretty by way of an excuse for the non-notability of its subject, that it was inserted into Wikipedia as a reciprocal link for some website. Izzis something Wikipedia does, or are we being snookered? &#8212; Bill 21:15, 19 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. We don't do reciprocal links this way. Not notable. Note that there was not VfD text, so I added one. --Improv 17:51, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: promo. Wile E. Heresiarch 18:47, 20 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, as evidenced by the many different references to him on Google, He seems to be very notable in some circles, the article probably can become encyclopedic with a little work.  &mdash; siro  &chi;  o  19:48, Oct 20, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: It is against policy to trade links. We don't need to, and we don't, and we can't and maintain integrity.  If someone makes him notable, fine.  Not like this, though. Geogre 01:04, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Notice: I expanded the entry a bit from what I could find on the net. &mdash; siro &chi;  o  11:11, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete not-notable author of vanity-press books Wolfman 17:40, 21 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete, article does not establish notability. Gamaliel 09:25, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Electronic publication does not generally make one notable. Isomorphic 23:23, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.