Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matt Deckard

 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. Redwolf24 23:28, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Matt Deckard
Vanity page --Howcheng 19:49, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Gets 23ish Google hits. -Splash 02:04, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete. Meets criteria under case A7, no assertion of significance. - Thatdog 02:06, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * I toyed with that idea, but concluded that the possibility was there that the "freelance writer" thing is an assertion of note. However, I think I was wrong on that point, since it is just a statement of what he does for a living and having a job isn't notable. -Splash 02:34, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Thatdog --Mysidia 02:51, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity Usrnme h8er 08:26, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete james gibbon  10:05, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, but I'm certainly not going to cry if it gets speedied. the wub  "?/!"  13:09, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, but I would argue that claiming to be a writer is a notability claim; similar to claiming to be a professor, so it isn't really a speedy candidate. --Scimitar parley 13:40, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. not notable. jni 14:21, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete a statement that a person is a member of a profession, whether writer, professor, doctor, or lawyer is not IMO a claim of notability. there are tens of thousands of each in the world, many not notable. I have marked this for speedy. DES 15:57, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not apparently notable. --SarekOfVulcan 19:04, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete article was written by someone unfamiliar with wikipedia practices, note the poorly written image link, so welcome to wikipedia, if you need help or advice, feel free to ask, but we don't include articles like this generally, if there is enough information available to write an article, and that information is the kind of information that belongs in an encyclopedia, please do write the article. Don't take it personally if this one gets deleted. Pedant 20:24, 2005 July 28 (UTC)
 * Delete nn vanity, speedy if possible. -- Etacar11   23:35, 28 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete poorly written vanity Uber nemo 00:36, July 29, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, non notable vanity. Decapod73 08:44, 29 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. But I don't think that it meets the speedy-criteria, so I've removed that template. --Mel Etitis  ( &Mu;&epsilon;&lambda; &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf; ) 15:33, 29 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.