Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pat Cottrell


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-11 05:21Z 

Pat Cottrell

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This has already been speedied once, but slightly more notability is now shown in the article. However, I still believe that this person is non-notable. Delete from me. J Milburn 18:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC) It is a pathetic shame that Wikipedia allows trolls to undermine the credibility of the site. unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Delete per WP:MUSIC; no evidence of notability; no coverage by independent sources. Only links are to his own and his band's websites.Walton monarchist89 19:44, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions.   -- SkierRMH 23:06, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Most definately fails WP:Music. Cricket02 23:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Find it absoulutely pathetic that a 16 yearold moron from England can evaluate entries as he does. This pubetic jackass needs a life.  Hey dude drop me your real address in England, and your real name, and your real phone number..etc.. WE'LL SEE WHAT'S UP.  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Comment: Is this 'abuse me in deletion discussions' week? Yes, I am 16. Yes, I have hobbies that some consider odd. Guess what? I have a fair understanding of Wikipedia policy, and, as far as I can see, this article does not meet Wikipedia policy. J Milburn 18:06, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Dude you are nothing but a nuisance. Stop deluding yourself.  Don't you see the pathetic irony.  You are a COMPLETELY UNNOTABLE INDIVIDUAL WITH NO PUBLIC ACCOMPLISHMENTS!!!Yet you fly all over this site judging individuals who do have public accomplishment.  You are a pubetic loser who has nothing better to do than abuse the public access features of Wikipedia.  You are nothing but a troll.  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Delete as not meeting WP:MUSIC unless sources are provided. As an aside, the author of the article may do well to assume good faith and tone down the attitude. Nuttah68 18:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Trolls are having a hey day here at Wikipedia. How can little dweebs who have ABSOLUTELY NO PUBLIC ACCOMPLIHMENTS be allowed to be GATEKEEPERS here.  How ironic.  The most pathetic of nobodys with nothing better to do than play dungeons and dragons can scan Wikipedia and delete accomplished individuals. Silly system Wikipedia.  You have allowed a haven for trolls. Wikipedia is a haven for trolls as proven by the many UNNOTABLE DWEEBS who are allowed to abuse the public access features of this site.  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Comment: Ah yes, Dungeons and Dragons. You know what? I have heard this whole rant before. You are not proving anything, and the only thing you are achieving is that you are amusing me somewhat. J Milburn 18:37, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: J Milburn is a very well-respected Wikipedian with a keen knowledge of this encyclopedia's accepted policies and the immature behavior by Paul Conners (talk) here is completely unacceptable.  Please read WP:Music, WP:V, WP:RS, for starters to see exactly why this article does not meet the basic standards for this encyclopedia.  Cricket02 18:41, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Changes to the citings have been made to Pat Cottrell. We have cited to a website which validates the existence and nature of material in the entry.  However we want to restate our protest that Wikipedia is being overun with editing and deleting trolls such as Wilburn and Cricket02 et all.  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Note to administrator: It is noticed by Paul Connors that "ONLY AN ADMINISTRATOR" can delete a file. Well I would expect that as an ADMINISTRATOR you would be willing to identify yourself.  Is there a phone number you can be reached at?  If not I would have to ask what on Earth qualifies you to be an ADMINISTRATOR.  ADMINISTRATORS have POWERS and with POWERS comes RESPONSIBILITY.  RESPONSIBILITY means identifying yourself with your birth name and phone contact information.  Or is all that stuff just too real for you? Just asking since you obviously are OK with having a bunch of troll run this site. unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Also there is such a notion as PROBABLE CAUSE. You are allowing these trolls to run around the site and instigate deletions that amounts to suppressing the legitimacy of Wikipedia.  THESE TROLLS ARE NOT SEEKING OUT ENTRYS RANDOMLY.  THEY ARE TARGETING ENTRYS WHICH GIVE THEM THE BIGGEST PERSONAL THRILL.  LIKE BAD COPS.  Is this the kind of public relations Wikipedia wants??  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Comment: No one who has taken part in this discussion is an administrator, and, even if they were, they would have every right not to reveal personal information about themselves. Accusing people of being trolls can be interpretted as offensive, please stop doing that. There is still nothing in the article that prooves that this person meets the Wikipedia policy on the subject. As for the matter of why this article has been 'targetted'- it appears to be about a non-notable subject. Wikipedia isn't about everything, only notable topics. J Milburn 19:10, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Kid once again. What you have to say is absolutely meaningless to me. You are a certified nobody (Troll). You perfectly illustrate the downside of computers getting cheaper and cheaper.  The fact that you are too timid to identify yourself in a way which would allow yourself to be contacted, yet you are enthusiastic about your trolling Activities proves my point.  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * TO: Wikipedia (generally),
 * Comment: You are welcome to contact me on my talk page, if you really feel the need to. Why do you need to know anything about me? Why do you have anything to say to me that you can't say here or on my talk page? J Milburn 19:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * No troll I'm not here to be your friend. So no not interested in your "talk page". You are a troll. Trolls are afraid to identify themselves.  unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)
 * Comment: No one is questioning the existence of the subject, just the notability.  I looked at the new cited material, the first link is a personal website that is nonexsitent . The next is a band website, proves existence, yes, but not notability, anyone can have a website.  The next link is listed twice,  and proves that the "Your're Big Break" show exists, yes, but does not mention this person was ever a guest, and even if it did, I still don't think the subject meets the notability guidelines for WP:Music.  I still stand with Delete.  Cricket02 19:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)
 * And this discussion is just that, a discussion on Wikipedia guidelines and trying to reach a consensus of many, either delete or keep according to the notability guidelines set forth by many. It is a fair system in my opinion, and your're right, only Admins can delete this article, but an Admin will come here and read the comments and delete only if consensus warrants.  Admins are voted in by the same process by the way, by a fair consensus.  Cricket02 19:36, 6 February 2007 (UTC)


 * To: Wikipedia (generally),

Look at the last entry from the troll..."you can talk to me on my talk page..." Please I'm not here to be your friend. Sorry troll not a taker. It is so pathetic that Wikipedia attracts so many trolls and lets these pathetically lonely nobodys be the gatekeepers for who is notable. Please. Wikipedia is crack cocaine for these patheticly lonely people. The sense of "power" these trolls get by entrenching their pathetic selves here at Wikipedia "deletion central" must be unprecedented across the web. Wikipedia please change your evaluation process. You are a haven for patheticly lonely and meaningless people. unsigned comment was added by Paul Conners (talk •contribs)


 * 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.