Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fabian Peake


 * 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. sources have not been adduced and the personal attacks on the nominator don't provide any policy based reason to keep this. Spartaz Humbug! 03:31, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Fabian Peake

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Miserably fails the WIKIPEDIA notability standards for WP:AUTHOR and WP:ARTIST. I stress the word WIKIPEDIA because the article's author is in the habit of creating articles for non-notable persons and then arguing for their inclusion based on notability standards that come from outside Wikipedia. In this case, we have a contributor whose disruptive article creations and eccentric reasoning  and personal attacks  are bordering on WP:CRANK, as he attempts to add numerous articles based on his genealogical research, in violation of both WP:OR and WP:NOTINHERITED. I suggest to other editors and to the closing admin that ONLY Wikipedia policies be used to guide the debate, completely ignoring outside arguments that have nothing to do with how notability is established for WP purposes. Qworty (talk) 04:23, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:RS showing notability are conspicuously absent. Chester Markel (talk) 04:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge the brief content to his wife, Phyllida Barlow, who is notable. He fails WP:ARTIST, though not by too much. Some of the nominators other noms are pretty poor quality too, while we're on the subject. Johnbod (talk) 13:11, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Strong leep I note the nominator's habit of vandalising articles about notable people or nominating them for deletion. pathetic Flying Fische (talk) 17:02, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Your opinion on the habits of the nominator is of absolutely no relevance whatsoever. This deletion discussion will be decided on the merits of the article, not on the merits of the person who made the nomination. If I were the reviewing administrator I would totally disregard your purely ad hominem comment. 80.168.197.161 (talk) 14:36, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:55, 20 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. Has had a few shows, but I'm not finding any reviews. Can anybody provide some? Abductive  (reasoning) 12:51, 21 May 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.