Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Honolulu Surrealist Group

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. Joyous 19:31, Mar 19, 2005 (UTC)

Honolulu Surrealist Group

 * Delete Extremely non-notable  Vanity Page  Article was created today by user Daniel C.Boyer as means for advertising and spam for his friends on Wikipeida. They run free (do-it-yourself website building) geocities site as indicated in link on article page.Classicjupiter2 20:18, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * I have no friends in the Honolulu Surrealist Group. Calling it a "vanity page" when I am not a member of the group and have no connexion to it is dishonest.  Calling it "advertising and spam" likewise.  That is has a Geocities site may be evidence of a lack of notability, but is not determinative in and of itself.  Your anti-surrealist vendetta continues.  --Daniel C. Boyer 20:20, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Dan, I sincerely disagree. This is no vendetta, just facts.Classicjupiter2 20:25, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Interesting how you, similarly to a large number of anonymous IPs, repeatedly protest "facts" or "just facts" (in addition to a number of other commonalities of expression). But I digress.  Clearly it is not "just facts" to call something non-notable; it is a matter of interpretation, regardless of how obvious anyone may find the interpretation.  --Daniel C. Boyer 19:17, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable. Megan1967 23:46, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, part of a wider, sometimes stealthy spam attack on WP. Once they have these toeholds, the plan is to slip in links, bios, promos... at this point, these can probably be speedied as vandalism. I would add that one of the hallmarks of classic surrealist activity is self-promotion. However, WP is a reflection of cultural impact, not a vehicle for creating it. Wyss 02:00, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)Wyss 01:58, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 03:52, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * I,agree with Wyss 100%. Starting off with a geocities website, then trying to establish notoriety and notability, (along with the benefits of unlimited and free exposure on here) upon having an article on Wikipedia is a shortcut to notability without having to produce the long term results that have a significant cutural impact. Anyone can get a geocities website and build their site and try to promote it on here.Classicjupiter2 03:57, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Another one? More spam! What makes the Honolulu group as notable as the Portland or US overall group (or notable at all)? Each article I see is usually one or two sentences about where the group exists, with external links :( Wyss is right.. Its speedy delete time. Tygar 04:05, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Only 6 google hits for "Honolulu Surrealist Group"; article gives no evidence of notability. -- Infrogmation 05:46, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless third-party verifiability exists - David Gerard 15:43, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as probably vanity/spam unless convincing, verifiable evidence to the contrary is presented prior to expiration of VfD. Dpbsmith (talk) 18:39, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless evidence is produced of its notoriety and/or notability. --Calton | Talk 00:38, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Postdlf 17:55, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.