Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene Lally


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 04:11, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Eugene Lally
For someone whose article has such big claims it's funny that "Eugene Lally" generates only 78 Google hits, the first two of which are Wikipedia. I think this could be a hoax, or at least non-notable RMHED 00:29, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment perhaps this citation is something to build on? Dunno... Swarthington (how swarthy are you?) 00:34, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. A whole lot of words documenting a whole lot of not-much. Created by . Coincidentally, perhaps, the article was also edited by, who keeps creating an article called Lally Consumer Value Index‎. I'm sensing a campaign. --Calton | Talk 00:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Person clearly exists, but nn and these pages may well be being created for nefarious purposes. Dave 02:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - makes claims that are both interesting and completely impossible for me to verify. This is what a hoax article looks like. My Alt Account 03:43, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete spammer. Danny Lilithborne 03:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Dave. &mdash; Khoikhoi 04:51, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Nigel (Talk) 09:38, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Spam, NN. +Fin- 13:17, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -- Totally NN Trnj2000 14:19, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:V and WP:AUTO unless Mr Lally, or anyone else for that matter, can supply solid references. He may be notable, but other than mistaken identity Ghits, there are more hits for his amateur photography than anything else. There are 2 or 3 hits for his corporation's site, and there was an announcement of an anti-wear lubricant in Automotive Industries magazine, Oct, 2000, but otherwise nothing substantial. Alumni can post almost what they want, so this alumni site at NWU fails WP:RS. Ohconfucius 02:20, 15 September 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.