Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ilias Lazaridis


 * 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. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:43, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Ilias Lazaridis

 * — (View AfD)

Article about some guy who apparently posts a lot in various Internet boards. The article is one of these "I want to attack the guy without crossing the Wikipedia blatant personnal attack line". The article was maintained almost solely by who, apparently had no other interests around here. In any case, no third-party reliable coverage seems to exist on the guy (despite high Ghits of course) so there's really nothing to build an article from. Pascal.Tesson 23:31, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I think I might have speedy tagged this article, although whether I would have called it spam, WikiProject Biography or attack I am uncertain!--Anthony.bradbury 23:38, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete Wikipedia is not a blog.  B e  a  rly  541  23:58, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete I added some info to this one a while back, then realized it's already been deleted once. Doesn't look like anything's changed since then, so delete it again. Ubernostrum 02:14, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Ilias is a well know "personality". There are plenty newsgroup posts from which the information in this article can be verified. Many of the posts are from Ilias himself, so that seems pretty reliable. The article's tone isn’t vengeful or accusing either. If Paris Hilton has an article, then why not Ilias? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 155.91.28.232 (talk • contribs)
 * Keep Comment from a random user: I found the wikipedia article after doing a Google search on Ilias Lazaridis after reading a long thread involving him in a Python mailing list. I was trying to evaluate the merits of his argument in that thread, and found the Wikipedia article to have some value in making my judgement. So I think this article is useful and should not be deleted (although it could be improved). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.109.153.225 (talk • contribs)
 * Comment the problem here is that while you might have found the article useful, we cannot guarantee its reliability and that's a big problem. What you are seeing is not an encyclopedic treatment of the subject but essentially one person's point of view. This is not what Wikipedia is about. Pascal.Tesson 18:50, 7 December 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.