Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Alan Gallant


 * 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 of the debate was delete – Gurch 13:00, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Greg Alan Gallant
Does not seems to be notable. abakharev 06:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and userfy to User:Tronus who seems to be Gallant as evidenced by his contributions-- TBC TaLk?!? 06:27, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * A novel is being published by this author. This events and history of this author are important to the era throughout the city of New York. This article should not be deleted. All notations will be used throughout the article as the author receives them.
 * Delete and userfy as per TBC. Non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers.   (aeropagitica)    (talk)   06:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * According to the list of notables: Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events -- Please clarify your wish for deletion.
 * How exactly is Gallant notable? His only "claims" to notability include the creation of a non-notable website with no Alexa ranking, for writing a few self-published non-notable books, as well as for taking pictures of 9/11 that don't seem to be mentioned anywhere by the media.-- TBC TaLk?!? 06:57, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm including the amazon.com book and as many links as I can until launch dates for upcoming sites are in. I'm not trying to 'fight' you personally, I'm trying to get an understanding on how to make this a valid entry, which it is due to the accomplishments of Gallant.  Also, please understand that an entire website under gallantnyc.com featuring the entire collection of his works and photography and published materials is launching.  I'm not sure what else is required.  FYI, there is an Alexa ranking.
 * Simply being included in amazon.com does not always merit notability, since amazon.com includes basically all books, regardless of notability, sales, or publisher. Also, I've just checked gallantnyc.com and it doesn't have an Alexa ranking as well. Either way, note that I am not trying to "fight" you personally either, though please remember that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and that entries on people with little or no notability should not be included. If you really want a web page about yourself, I suggest you go to myspace or geocities. -- TBC TaLk?!? 07:16, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * You've still not defined 'little' notability per the deletion guidelines. There are many up-and-coming authors with wiki entries.  Myspace and geocities for a software engineer with a personal site launch?  The dry humor is noted, but the validity for deletion is not.  GallantNyc.com is a newly launching site under development, how does an Alexa ranking for a newly developed site have anything to do with notable references to the history of an author living in New York City with details going back 9 years?  It doesn't.  There is still no clear definition on how you describe what is notable 'enough' for acceptance.  It is understood this is an encyclopedia and due the oustanding accomplishments of this author it is a valid entry for this encyclopedia. --Tronus 07:31, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Articles on "up-and-coming authors" not only violate WP:BIO, but WP:NOT as well. Also, I mentioned the Alexa ranking of GallantNyc.com since you noted above that "there is an Alexa ranking" when there clearly wasn't. If you really wanted to know Wikipedia's perspective of notability and criteria for keeping articles, feel free to check WP:BIO, WP:N, or WP:NOT. Anyhow, please try not to take this personally, I'm doing my best to remain civil. :)-- TBC TaLk?!? 07:38, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not taking it personal, I'm actually learning as we converse, I just need to understand why this would not be a valid entry for this wiki considering it was just entered with bio pertinent to the author's information and career. Also the Alexa entry was in reference to skratchpad.com, not to gallantnyc.com which is in launching stage.  The main point was not to just get WP:BIO and have at that, but to get an understanding on why exactly this would not be considered a viable entry for an entity with multiple notable references, especially when there's been no chance for the author's fanbase or anybody to update the information themselves.
 * Overall, basically it does not seem to be a notable entry because: 1. No google results 2. The websites he created have no Alexa ranking  and are not mentioned in any major media sources thus not notable (note that Alexa shows the site's traffic ranking). 3. Being a self-published author violates WP:BIO 4. Being listed on amazon.com does not merit notability 5. Books not yet published, thus violating WP:NOT 6. No citations to verify that Gallant has had his photos published in any major media sources-- TBC TaLk?!?  08:00, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:BIO and WP:VAIN . --Coredesat talk 07:32, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Going over WP:VAIN according to Wiki definitions: An article should not be dismissed as "vanity" simply because the subject is not famous. --Tronus 07:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Assuming this isn't a vanity article, he's still not notable per WP:BIO. --Coredesat talk 08:17, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
 * An article should not be dismissed as "vanity" simply because the subject is not famous.  I'm still trying to figure out what that's supposed to mean, but regardless, if a subject is not famous, why would they have an article? --Calton | Talk 01:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. NN.  TLDPTM, M. (H: A:III, Sc:ii; WS)  -- GWO
 * Delete NN. WP:VAIN, QED. --Calton | Talk 01:36, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
 * delete as above Pete.Hurd 02:34, 29 June 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.