Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Pink


 * 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.  Singu larity  08:01, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Jonathan Pink

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article apparently created by the subject himself raising WP:COI issues. Reads like an advertisement, with a little POV language, and absolutely no publicly verifiable, third-party reliable sources. A Lexis-Nexis news search produces no hits for the name “Jonathan Pink,” “lawyer,” “attorney,” “Los Angeles,” etc. also calling into question the notability of the subject per WP:N. A google search yields similar results with hits registering only for self-published articles on blogs and the corporate website. J Readings 05:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - A self promotional article about a non notable individual. -  Ca ri bb e a  n ~ H. Q.  06:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:A7, as well as the reasons noted above. -- B figura (talk) 06:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete on grounds that this reads as pure self-promotion, i.e. spam--Gavin Collins 08:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Barely asserts notability, but nothing here that couldn't be said of thousands of other lawyers. NawlinWiki 16:27, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not a whole lot of results that makes mention of this particular individual which does not seem to be very famous. COI Issues, not sources, OR and POV, fails in multiple ways and can easily be a CSD A7 and CSD A11 nominees.--JForget 01:09, 22 August 2007 (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.