Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Di Leo


 * 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 per WP:SNOW. I have declined to salt it, since in general, pages are not protected preemptively. If it is continually recreated, file a request on WP:RFPP. J.delanoy gabs adds 00:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Paul Di Leo

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

This article was brought up as a possible instance of paid editing; after looking it over and seeking out references, I don't feel the person in question is notable under WP:MUSIC. The subject is claimed to have a solo CD, as well as a "hit song" with a previous band... well, the "hit song" turns up less than 30 Google hits, which a hit from 1995 should probably surpass. He himself gets a couple thousand hits... but there are definitely other people using the name Paul Di Leo, which adds to the challenge of sifting through and turning up results for him. The record label the album is on does not appear to be notable. This article does have a number of paper references, but it doesn't really indicate how any of them refer to the subject himself. All told, and combined with the likely paid editing (see the COIN thread above for details), this article is definitely problematic. Tony Fox (arf!) 04:43, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Strong delete per nom. You just beat me to it. Themfromspace (talk) 04:46, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Take out Wikipedia and its mirrors, and a search for "Luscious Love" "Imitation of Life" comes up with 10 Google hits, none of them a reliable source.   Little Red Riding Hood  talk  04:54, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:MUSIC. "Paid editing" is also a concern - this article may only seek promotional value for the organization involved.-- Flewis (talk) 06:50, 20 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Fails WP:MUSIC.Nrswanson (talk) 10:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Fails WP:MUSIC. Tatarian (talk) 15:00, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and Salt. Fails WP:MUSIC and was almost certainly a paid article. That being said, if it's deleted, I bet it will come right back. Undead Warrior (talk) 15:40, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Fails WP:MUSIC, paid editing. --John Nagle (talk) 16:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Personally I could care less about the paid editing (as long as it was within the bounds of NPOV language) but regardless of all that it still fails WP:MUSIC and the buck stops there.   coccyx bloccyx  (toccyx)  21:39, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Decidedly off-key in regard to WP:MUSIC. But I agree with Coccyx -- the off-Wiki machinations that gave birth to this article are not relevant to the article's basic Wiki-based problems. Ecoleetage (talk) 23:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt to prevent its recreation until it can be shown that notability concerns are addressed.  AK Radecki Speaketh  02:27, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- raven1977 (talk) 19:44, 21 October 2008 (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.