Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Liam Dixon


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:32, 11 August 2017 (UTC)

Liam Dixon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable writer lacking in-depth, non-trivial support. red dogsix (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:59, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 20:59, 4 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete per G5 - article created by sock of a blocked sockmaster (checkuser block). Delete Clearly failing WP:BASIC and hence WP:CREATIVE also. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:48, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * , The author's account isn't tagged as a sock, there's no SPI in his name, nothing indicating he's been previously blocked linking to his userpage or to his talkpage. I'd read 's refusal to unblock as a comment on Liam's being master of involved IPs rather than being sock of another user. It would be great to get rid of this nonsense article on a speedy rather than waiting another 5 days - could you provide some material to make WP:SNOW please? Thanks, Cabayi (talk) 19:14, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * If I'd wanted to make a comment I would have; no need to reinterpret. My checkuser on this account found another sock account; I blocked that too when I indeffed Speedydixon. Process question: is there any reason this isn't A7? --jpgordon&#x1d122;&#x1d106; &#x1D110;&#x1d107; 19:46, 6 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - this page is just a continuation of the author's narcissistic self-promotion & vandalism under a different title. Cabayi (talk) 06:50, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, does not meet notability criteria and an obvious self-promotional piece. The only reference provided is written by the article's subject and creator. RA 0808  talkcontribs 07:24, 6 August 2017 (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.