Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Josephthelover

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:37, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

Josephthelover
LiveJournal vanity. Joyous (talk) 02:48, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * vanity. Please Delete ColoradoZ 02:50, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Uvaduck 02:53, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete with prejudice. (I've restored the rest of the votes here after User:Jj6 blanked this VfD page. Incidentally, it's not showing up on the main VfD page. I can't tell why.) &mdash; mendel &#9742; 03:14, July 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity. Jaxl 03:50, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Four hits on Google, vanity. Cookiecaper 04:00, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete; nn. Antandrus  (talk) 04:01, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy -- nn and vanity, so out it goes, I say -mysekurity 04:48, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete (weak). This is on the edge of vanity and is almost not vanity IMHO. Badly written and no point in cleaning up. DarthVader 05:29, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * What should be done after Jj6 removed the text of the article? The evidence of this act is at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Josephthelover&diff=18514164&oldid=18513650. DarthVader 07:22, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity Rillian 16:28, 10 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete complete and total pointless vanity. Jj6 blanked it again. I'm guessing he's also the anon who created it and if he wants it gone... --Etacar11 01:45, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * keep. this page is being linked to from livejournal, thousands of people coming here--go to the debate community(8000 members alone) for proof. He is probably the best known, active member of the whole livejournal community(go check) If shmeky(rachael waterman) deserves a page here, i think he should also. (unsigned by 65.92.146.4)
 * What is the article about 'shmeky(rachael waterman)' called? DarthVader 06:27, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * This person has a point. What qualifies as notable and what is not notable when it comes to livejournal and other internet personalities? Rachelle Waterman is an article, but I guess that it isn't only about the livejournal aspect. Some other articles about livejournal users can be found on Livejournal. DarthVader 10:33, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable vanity. JamesBurns 08:09, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: The person does not have a point, because Wikipedia is not a free web host.  Wikipedia is also not a web guide.  Hence, if thousands, or tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, are going to the article a day, it is irrelevant.  Does the subject appear in contexts sufficiently diverse to require a biography?  No.  Has the subject achieved significant changes in the world? No.  Has the subject been a pioneer or influential figure in a new realm of endeavor?  No.  Are the facts of the life verifiable?  No.  Is the biography a statement of POV?  Yes.  Was the biography self authored?  Apparently.  Well, there you go:  deletion guidelines say delete, and so do the voters. Geogre 12:54, 11 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.