Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Raphael


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 10:05, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Michael Raphael

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Notariety Exagerated his BIO and appears to have fabricated his web site to include works he has not done or did little on. Using WIKI as a place to make business contacts with exagerated and fabricated bio. Google search reveals no reliable sources. Given the amount of fraud that is preyed upon unsuspected talent who might cough up money thinking this guy is somebody when he is not warrants wiki's deleting this page for not notable person Dymo400 (talk) 10:31, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete; cannot find reliable, independent sources in Google regarding this person specifically (except perhaps this, if it's the same person, which just mentions him in passing), particularly in regards to his supposed recent work with Disney, Hannah Montana and High School Musical 3 (which I'd assume would be mentioned at least once somewhere in a reliable online source). Many of the accomplishments he mentions in song writing and "sharing the stage" with other performers was in Neve (band), not his solo career, and is already covered in that article. I cannot find any proof in reliable, independent sources that he passes any criterion in WP:MUSIC. Somno (talk) 12:39, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Also Dymo400, I would like to ask that you reconsider the content of your opening statement, because the biographies of living persons policy applies throughout Wikipedia and it is inappropriate to refer to a real person as a fraud. Somno (talk) 12:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Somo how the rewording to you of "appears to have fabricated" does that satisfy the policy? Let me know how you feel about that, thanks.--Dymo400 (talk) 06:45, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Not quite - you should focus on the content of the article, and why the article should be deleted based on its content, rather than commenting on the motives of the article's subject or creator. For example, you could have said "Article's subject appears to fail notability criteria; cannot find independent sources that verify the article's claims" - that gets across what you have said, without being offensive towards the article's subject. Somno (talk) 09:53, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as per Somno and suggest that someone who wishes to big-up their achievements should used Facebook or LinkedIn. Eddie.willers (talk) 15:53, 18 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:00, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per Somno. -- aktsu (t / c) 05:04, 25 April 2009 (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.