Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gerard de Marigny


 * 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. Michig (talk) 07:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

Gerard de Marigny

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Delete. Advertorially toned WP:BLP of a self-published writer, based entirely on primary and user-generated sources with not one shred of reliable source coverage in real media shown at all. This appears to have been created by a direct colleague of his in defiance of our conflict of interest rules, and then edited by the subject himself in defiance of WP:AUTOBIO. And too many of the notability claims here are on the order of "got X number of views for a YouTube video" and "is included in online directories of quotations", which don't contribute notability (the quotation directories, significantly, are mostly user-generated ones to which a subject can add himself.) None of this, neither the sourcing nor the substance, is enough. Bearcat (talk) 00:32, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment: If there are sources about him being part of Americade that aren't primary then that can help establish notability, assuming that the band is notable. Offhand it looks like it should be, however I note that the same COI that has been editing de Marigny's article was also editing the band's article, so the band's notability is somewhat questionable given the semi-promotional tones in the band article and the relatively weak sourcing currently in Americade's article. I'll see what I can find, but offhand the article seems to focus a lot on his novel. I'm going to remove the mentions of it selling well on Amazon, since that's not something that would give notability and we can only really add that to the article if there is a lot of coverage in independent RS that would justify adding it. So far this looks to be a great example of why COI editing should be done extremely carefully, since there's so much promotional puffery in the article (and in the band's article) that it would probably need to be TNT'd in order to make it fit NPOV and GNG. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:44, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I also removed the quotes section. That was unambigously spammy and it also doesn't help that offhand the sites all accept user submissions, meaning that it wouldn't be hard to add things for any given person. I've issued a COI warning to the user in question. Offhand I'm concerned that there might be a bit of a walled garden here. If de Marigny's article is deemed nn, I'd recommend taking a hard look at the band page as well. The sheer spam and weak claims of notability in the author's article makes me kind of concerned that the band could potentially fail NBAND. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:50, 17 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. I'd endorse a speedy deletion as unambiguous promotion, except that I've got a strong feeling that AfD would become inevitable since a search shows that the author is extremely prolific in trying to promote himself and his work on the Internet. Wikipedia just happens to be the latest outlet for this promotion. None of his books are notable per Wikipedia guidelines and the only halfway decent source is this article, which is just a reprint of a blog review, which is considered a WP:SPS. He landed on the Amazon bestseller list, however that's a list that's specifically highlighted as a non-notability giving list on Wikipedia because it's relatively easy to manipulate - especially when you start branching off into the individual categories and sub categories and into country-specific branches. It's not even something worth mentioning on Wikipedia unless multiple independent and reliable sources mention it as something of note. The band does give some assertion of notability, however I'm extremely concerned about the notability for that article, given the sheer amount of promotional puffery and use of non-RS to assert notability in the author's article. I'm going to take a good hard look at the band's article. Unless there's a ton of coverage for it in good, strong RS, it'd likely stand to be deleted as well, even if only as a TNT because it's so darn promotional. I've asked for help at the rock WP, but offhand I'm leaning heavily towards nominating it just to get it TNT'd. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:05, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * I've nominated it at Articles for deletion/Americade (band). It's actually something that could arguably be speedied as sheer promotional puff. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  07:20, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. Regards,  KC Velaga   ✉  12:30, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. Regards,  KC Velaga   ✉  12:30, 17 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America1000 19:29, 17 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete non-notable writer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 07:39, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. See also Articles_for_deletion/Americade_(band) - David Gerard (talk) 17:58, 22 August 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.