Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oscar Araripe


 * 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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Kusma (討論) 01:27, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Oscar Araripe
Vanity page Dr.frog 22:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks to me like this is just a vanity page created by the person the article is about. Same user was spamming the same content in other inappropriate places, like Category:Calligraphers.  Also see user:Araripe.  Dr.frog 22:12, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Intense vanity advertising; from the big # of G-hits, the subject could be notable, but if he is, it certainly doesn't show in this convoluted article. Also, at least the first part of the article is a copyvio of his own site . -- Kicking222 22:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as vanity and advertcruft. Funnybunny (talk/QRVS) 22:26, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not entirely happy with the starting point of this AfD where vanity per se seems to be considered a basis for deletion. It is not. See Vanity: "vanity by itself is not a basis for deletion, but lack of importance." We should be considering whether this article is about a subject of sufficient note. From the list of shows and previous mention of google hits, it would seem the subject may well be. In this case we are deleting a subject because it's badly written. The whole point of a collaborative project is to work together to improve articles, and to communicate with other editors.Tyrenius 23:13, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Should be rewritten for NPOV but I don't think it deserves deletion. He is obviously a noted and popular figure in Brazil.  The lack of article here means that it probably should be on the Portuguese WP (where he also has an account), but now that it's here I think it could be made into a good article.  Aguerriero  ( talk ) 23:24, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't know whether Araripe is notable or not; this isn't my area of expertise.  I only noticed that this user had been spamming other pages when I was doing some category cleanup, and then poked around to see if he had other edits that needed to be reverted.  Certainly the content of this article as it stands now is unacceptable, and there is nothing to revert to.  I've also noticed in the past that proposing a problematic article for deletion is the surest way to bring it to the attention of someone who cares enough to fix it instead. ;-)  Dr.frog 01:23, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Please note: I have done a drastic pruning of this article, which (I hope) no longer resembles the one which was proposed for AfD. Tyrenius 02:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep after rewrite of article as above. Tyrenius 12:46, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Thanks for the rewrite.  Perhaps tag this for fact-checking and cleanup, as well as being a stub, though.  Dr.frog 13:30, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll leave that to you, having done all I intend to for Mr Araripe ;-). Fact checking certainly. Clean-up? A few wikilinks? Tyrenius 14:54, 17 May 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.