Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New topic


 * 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 speedy delete and salt. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 06:49, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

New topic

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

Article previously tagged for speedy deletion, was contested, I declined speedy because there was at least a claim of notability. I don't believe the claim is strong enough, though; from what I can tell, the individual has won one minor award (I see no indication that this award is a huge deal), and most of the "reference" links included at the bottom of the article are the individual's own websites (google pages, google groups, etc.). r ʨ anaɢ talk/contribs 06:19, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy userfy to User:Sachdeva sameer. Since the subject matches the article creator's name, the best assumption is that if the article does not look much like a true encyclopedia article, the creator would want it to be treated as a userpage. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 07:30, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I am a little concerned about encouraging this to be in the userspace. He doesn't meet standards of notability or verifiability with independent resources. Drawn Some (talk) 08:05, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither do you, or I, or Rjanag, and yet we all have user pages in the userspace. A user is not required to prove notability through independent sources to have a user page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 10:01, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Please review WP:UP. This sort of content is clearly inappropriate and expressly forbidden in a guideline (though not a policy).  As I say, we shouldn't encourage it.  The two statements in my original opinion should be reversed to make my thoughts clear, I apologize, it should be deleted because he doesn't meet standards etc. and in addition and as a separate matter I am concerned about encouraging this to be in the userspace. Drawn Some (talk) 17:22, 10 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete, do not userfy. This is just someone's resume; Wikipedia is not a resume-hosting service. But although it clearly fails to be sufficiently notable for an article, it contains enough of an assertion of significance to be ineligible for A7 speedy deletion. WP:G11, blatant self-promotion, is an outside possibility but too much of a stretch for my taste, so I would prefer just to wait out the week and then delete it normally. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:59, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete borderline speedy delete. Perhaps by SNOW if not speedy. DGG (talk) 00:53, 11 May 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.