Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joel Gausten


 * 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 14:20, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Joel Gausten

 * - (|View AfD) (View log)

Who the hell is this? Who the hell is this guy and why is he in Wikipedia? He created the page himself, methinks. DELETE! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.246.175 (talk • contribs)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 10:01, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Comment - This article is probably a hoax. A 33-year old guy with 2500 articles in several different fields? Assuming he starts at age 15, that's nearly 3 a week. Hmmm... WorldCat shows zero libraries worldwide holding books by this purported multiple-book-writing "author"... Excellent challenge, good catch. Carrite (talk) 13:41, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * After having perused some footnotes, I'm convinced it's not a complete hoax. Let's just call him a "non-notable rock journalist prone to exaggeration." Carrite (talk) 13:46, 24 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - "He created the page himself, methinks." The article was written by User:Joelgausten. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess) &#124; (talk to me) &#124; (What I've done)  13:43, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:47, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Yes, he's written a lot of web articles - but that doesn't make him notable per WP:BIO. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:19, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:BIO (not to mention WP:AUTO). It doesn't help that Joel created the article in June 2006 and hasn't been on Wikipedia since. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:31, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Which is not to say he's not watching this outcome with baited breath:
 * From: misfitmole@XXXXXXX Subject: "A non-notable rock journalist prone to exaggeration"
 * To: MutantPop@aol.com — Date: July 24, 2010 2:45:09 PM PDT
 * [Message]: "This coming from a failed record label owner reduced to getting his rocks off via Wikipedia policing. How the mighty have fallen. [End.]
 * —Carrite (talk) 22:55, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Subject contends that "2500 is actually quite conservative" and adds: "Also, you may or may not be aware that the initial reason for my page being scrutinized is a person's vendetta against me, but that's another topic for another time." So I'll soften things up in terms of my own statement and leave it to you all, taking that under advisement... Carrite (talk) 23:10, 24 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Interesting statement: "Also, you may or may not be aware that the initial reason for my page being scrutinized is a person's vendetta against me, but that's another topic for another time." - A source for this, please? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.246.201 (talk) 07:14, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment. Someone please fix this nomination so that the daily log has a proper link to this discussion. I just spent 10 minutes trying to fix another nomination and still couldn't get it quite right, so this needs someone who knows what they're doing to fix it. Phil Bridger (talk) 00:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * His wife. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shannon_Gardner-Gausten - Her article was deleted. So why not nuke this guy's page straight away? And here you find this: http://www.satannet.com/JGausten77/blog/873/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.204.246.201 (talk) 07:22, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. For sure, the guy has no real significance and the article is nothing but blatant self-advertising. PikkoroDaimao (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 07:23, 30 July 2010 (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.