Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric pearl


 * 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 Speedy delete as a copyright violation of a copyrighted ("© 2006 The Reconnection, LLC") non-GFDL web page, which was the subject's autobiography. I recommend User:Uncle G/On notability to any editor thinking of writing a fresh article about this (or indeed any other) person. Uncle G 17:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)

Eric pearl
Makes some rather dubious notability claims. I am going to stay out of the discussion. Andrew Levine 14:50, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep and massively cleanup. Whether he can heal people magically and make them see angels I cannot say, but the part about having written a published book appears to be true according to Amazon.  Needs much cleanup and sourcing. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete And also happens to be a copy of this page . --Porqin 15:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Copyvio WilyD 15:13, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Cleanup. Only problem I see here is that it is ripped directly from another web page.  Cdcon   16:04, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Which is, in fact, not only an excellent criterion for deletion, but a criterion for Speedy Deletion under WP:COPYVIO. WilyD 16:15, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * We don't keep copyright violations. Our Copyright policy is a Foundation issue and non-negotiable. Uncle G 17:49, 9 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete not enough notable. ev. move: wrong case! -- Cate 16:10, 9 August 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.