Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nigel Gohl


 * 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 of the debate was Speedy delete as lacking any credible claim to notability (A7). And because it sucks like a Dyson on speed. Just zis Guy you know? 13:35, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

Nigel Gohl
Non notable personage, book appears to be self published, main editor of article appears to be the person in mention. Ben W Bell  talk  09:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - Has Reverted whenever attempts are made at changing the article towards amore NPOV. Shouldn't be here anyway. --DennyCrane 09:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete this guy seems determined to avoid NPOV and keeps removing the AFD notice. I just put it back myself. WP:NOT a place to advertise. If someone can show that this guy or his book is notable then there might be a case for keeping it although with a massive rewite. Ydam 10:03, 6 June 2006 (UTC

DO NOT DELETE - The people who originally put this article into dispute and now want to delete this page have no foundations or facts for doing this besides the fact that they have a jealous hatred of Nigel Gohl. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nige 54 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete - I'd personally tag it myself if I didn't think it would be removed by the user in question... pure vanity gibberish IMHO... - Adolphus79 10:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * this could make a fine user page though... - Adolphus79 10:57, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * the article is being proposed for deletion as somebody believes the subject is not notable. you can read more about the notability criteria here. WP:NOTABILITY If you feel the articles subject meets these criteria please tell us here. Meanwhile can you please refrain from removing the AFD notice from the article Ydam 10:28, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

DO NOT DELETE - This article has superior notability and is based on fact.

It could be considered an advertisement but so could everything in Wikipedia! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nige 54 (talk • contribs)

DO NOT DELETE -- Please block users such as Ydam and those who have edited this article without being logged in......they are being a nuisance to the facts and nothing more. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nige 54 (talk • contribs)


 * weak keep The wanker of the week award may be an interesting way of giving the person notability, but I am not sure if it fits as a wikipedia article. As a side note, a G search actually returns a few references, and the ISBN actually returns a bookstore or two, if not any more than that, which stock the book. He has appeared on the Sunrise Australian National TV program promoting his profession. A Sydney Morning Herald Journalist thinks his work as notable . The fact that MediaMan has nige54.com listed as an "associate" site does little for the credibility of that interview though.  Ans  e  ll  10:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Autobiographical, non-notable, POV rubbish. And his behaviour here just confirms it. -- Necrothesp 10:45, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - nn. Appears to be an advertisement. - Gimboid13 10:30, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete self-promotion coupled with vandalism Markeer 11:37, 6 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions.   --  Ans  e  ll  10:47, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Necrothesp. Sandstein 11:44, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Claptrap. -- GWO
 * Delete. If this article is not deleted then it is setting the precedent that ANYONE has the right to a wikipedia article, all they have to do is SELF-PUBLISH a book, run their OWN website, and be mercilessly insulted throughout the Australian blogsphere (as long as they write the article themselves, of course!).  Need I remind you that "Samuel Gordon Stewart" and "Lee Hotti" both failed to make the grade as far as notability was concerned. And "Lee Hotti" had supporters other than himself. Let's face facts.  The only person who has ever made a positive comment about Nigel Gohl is Nigel Gohl.  Through his website, through his book and through his entirely self-written wikipedia article.  Can I re-iterate, if this article is kept on the grounds of notability, it means that every person in the world capable of self-publishing their own book, maintaining their own website and writing their own wikipedia article is entitled to one.  I elliot 12:22, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete vanispamcruftisement for self-published author. And dating coach, FFS.  Now there's a thing the world needs fewer of. Just zis Guy you know? 13:18, 6 June 2006 (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.