Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Biggins


 * 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--Anthony Bradbury"talk" 19:20, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Michael Biggins

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I frankly would've simply PRODed but it may be removed so here we are; I frankly am not considering the listed link convincing enough for his own established notability and searches aren't finding anything else actually better. SwisterTwister  talk  20:04, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable and reads like a mini promo page; also, no RS sources to rely on. Kierzek (talk) 20:30, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - I first became aware of Mr. Biggins in 2007, early in my editing career, via NPPing a page related to him, which was eventually deleted and salted per Articles for deletion/Blurpinkle. From his edits then and since, the author,  seemed at best to be closely associated with Mr. Biggins, or at worst a sock- or meatpuppet.  Biggins had openly edited as himself as .  Biggins' own account was indef-blocked in 2010 per WP:NOTHERE, while ManofThoth was indef'd in 2015 as a spam-only SPA.  (Biggins' web page links to this article but claims that "WIKIPEDIA is run by NATZIS.")  Another AfD related to Biggins is Articles for deletion/Gladys Ridgeford--another possible one may be Articles for deletion/Blackout's Box, but an admin may need to check that one.
 * As for the article at hand, I've looked for better sources and failed to find them. I hadn't really focused on the notability of Biggins himself in the previous kerfuffle (or maybe I'd decided to save that fight for another day), but I don't see the evidence that he meets WP:GNG today.  -- Finngall   talk  21:33, 28 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete I had some quite extensive dealings with this article a few months ago but then it sort of fell off my radar. I could find nothing close to satisfying GNG then and I find nothing now. It is and always was basically self-promotion, and that applies also to many of the sources that a bunch of experienced editors removed while etc persisted in their socking. - Sitush (talk) 23:19, 28 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete a non-notable YouTube performer.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:58, 2 August 2016 (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.