Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Lefkowith (2nd nomination)


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 00:51, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Gary Lefkowith
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non Notable. Subject fails notability. Google search returns only self made entries and contact pages. Nothing really about subjects career or notability. Canyouhearmenow 11:14, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:35, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. Appears to satisfy WP:MUSIC notability requirements, albeit barely.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mystic Technocrat (talk • contribs) 17:47, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Upon a search the claims of people worked with and projects proposed either do not pull up or in many cases do not mention the subject. Most searches are hits that are created or maintained by the subject. I would think that this would certainly fall short of the GNG guidelines of reliable sourcing that are independent of the subject. Canyouhearmenow 18:52, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete With all of the detail in the article, I, too, expected to find sources ... but no. I find mentions, and a few short quotes, but that's all. And there are some oddities, like the claim about TEEC records, but I can find only bare evidence (two youtube videos) that such a thing exists. Lefkowith is included in the articles for Chubby Checker and Charlie Gracie but without citations for those statements. It also appears, from this edit, for example, that those statements were added by User:hifiadd which is the name of Lefkowith's company. They therefore may have been added "from memory" rather than from sources. LaMona (talk) 20:51, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * User:hifiadd is in fact Mr. Lefkowith. He has been placing things on my talk page in an effort to get me to withdraw my deletion request. However, even in the links he has presented there is only a small mention of him if any and nothing that would support the claims or to help build a cohesive article. Hence the reason I placed the article up for deletion to start with. Here is the link to my talk page in which you will find the links he has provided. I am still convinced the article does not meet WP:GNG or WP:BLP guidelines. --Canyouhearmenow 22:34, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, he's hassling me on my talk page, too, here and being quite unpleasant, which is absolutely the wrong approach. He has outed himself as User:hifiadd, which is in violation of the username policy, as I notified him. LaMona (talk) 00:21, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * LaMona I had noticed the user name violation but I figured it would be rectified should the article be deleted. In many cases I see where the users are editing within minutes of each other. This may be also an issue of WP:Sockpuppet or WP:Piggybacking. I encourage other editors chiming in on the AFD to please review these things so that we can make the right decision.--Canyouhearmenow 03:08, 18 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Removing this article would not remove the username issue, because this username has, and could still, edit other articles. So the username needs to change if the user ever wishes to edit again. I did leave both COI and a username policy links on the user's talk page, with links to the name change directions. LaMona (talk) 03:29, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * LaMona I totally agree with you regarding the username. I made my statement based off of the history of the use of the username being that it has only been used to edit this article and articles associated with the article. I do agree that the issue needs to be dealt with however.--Canyouhearmenow 15:58, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete instead as I'm still not seeing enough to actually suggest his own substance in independent notability. SwisterTwister   talk  04:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Whatever sort of notoriety he's obtained in terms of promoting and creating music, I don't see evidence to support notability in terms of Wikipedia guidelines. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 09:50, 24 July 2016 (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.