Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Knurek


 * 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 of the debate was delete NSL E (T+C) 08:52, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Knurek
Non-notable vanity. Kevin 00:26, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as A7. Alr 00:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per above. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 00:55, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I am new to articles but I disagree with assessment of "non-notable" as well as that of "vanity." As a resident of CT, I feel I am in a position to assess notability of people from the state. If you feel the article is too much in the direction of "vanity," then please edit and/or suggest how to remove vanity from the article (which I assert is not "vanity" in itself).--RexRex84 01:00, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Feel free to disagree, but our policy (WP:VAIN) is quite clear on this. Alr 01:14, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the link to vanity pages. I still fail to see how the article is in itself "vanity." Is it an issue of verifiable information? I can tell you that the subject is well-known and people in the region would be interested in the information. Published facts attesting to the "notable" status of the subject is well-founded. If there are parts of the article that are deemed "vanity" then they can be deleted, but I think the article as a whole is not. Information about the subject is of value, but perhaps not all of it. Moreover, it seems as if the policy is a little vague (as it concedes) and I think this issues can be remedied without deletion of the article. Also, per A7, the article's subject does not lack importance, and is in fact fairly important in its respective region.--68.9.241.103 01:29, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to discuss policy, I would reccomend doing so on Wikipedia talk:Vanity guidelines, rather than here. Alr 01:37, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as non-notable vanity biography Recommend the article author see WikiMe for writing biographies and/or WikiTree for writing genealogies. &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-04 01:51Z 
 * Thanks for suggestion. Can someone advise on how author can remove page?
 * The creator of the article can request it be Speedy Deleted by adding  to the top of the original article (this is G7 under WP:CSD) &mdash;Quarl (talk) 2006-01-04 02:13Z 
 * Delete. wikipedia is not a family history site. The suggestions of alternative wikis given by Quarl seem more appropriate for this if it must be kept at all. Evil Eye 02:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That's what I was asking about a biography site, I misplaced the article I guess (according to policy guidelines). I am asking how to remove an article (how an author can). "The suggestions of alternative wikis given by Quarl seem more appropriate for this if it must be kept at all"...No need to be confrontational, please advise on how to remove.
 * Comment: The AfD process is that which removes pages - an admin will come around in a few days and likely delete the page. -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 02:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom -- Thesquire (talk - contribs) 02:23, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. None of the members of the family even have their own article. JHMM13 (T | C) [[Image:Flag of the United States.svg|25px| ]] [[Image:Flag of Germany.svg|25px|  ]] 03:34, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as what is now an empty article. Jamyskis Whisper, Contribs 08:09, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ISNOT (a genealogy) and generally unencyclopaedic in tone per WP:VAIN, or userfy if RexRex wants it. We were all newbies once :-) Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] [[Image:Flag of the United Kingdom.svg|25px|  ]] AfD? 11:48, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete reads like a Christmas card letter -- MisterHand 15:35, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This is so totally a realtor ad, once you get to the bottom and see what it's really about. -- Tenebrae 21:28, 4 January 2006 (UTC)


 * DeleteAs author of article, I support deletion. end of discussion. --RexRex84 22:21, 4 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete, per nominator and article creator. Can&#39;t sleep, clown will eat me 09:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. --Terence Ong Talk 14:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, self advertisement. Blnguyen 07:32, 6 January 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.