Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Paddon

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was delete. Dmcdevit·t 07:44, August 17, 2005 (UTC)

Peter Paddon
I'm not sure if this person is notable, but the text reads like pure advertizement for his DVD products Allegrorondo 21:05, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. "Peter Paddon, Author and Witch". Hilarious. He had a coven numbering 22 people, spread across England. He grew up in Tidworth, which is "a few miles from Stonehenge on the Salisbury Plain", which of course makes him notable. He has had two books published by these people, although they only list one of them. I'm more notable that this person.-Ashley Pomeroy 21:20, 9 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Comment Someone removed the more blatant advertizing from the article, but still reads like a book jacket. Allegrorondo 21:28, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment I removed the promotion, but I don't know enough about Wicca to know if this guy is as important as he thinks he is. If what Ashley Pomeroy says is true, then by all means Delete--Outlander 14:15, 10 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Userfy if at all possible, otherwise delete. I could write that much about myself... if I was, like, really bored and stuff. -- BD2412 talk 01:07, August 10, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete. I never noticed the word 'notable' in the list I linked from, and would not have added the page there if I had. I mentioned Stonehenge as the nearest geographical point non-local people would recognize, not because it makes me significant. This was not an exercise in ego, just an experiment, one that taught me an awful lot about the people here. Get rid of it. Incidentally, Capall Bann might be a small publisher, but it is very highly regarded by the Pagan/Wiccan community both in the UK and the US, and they do list both books. They certainly don't deserve to be referred to as "these people". Peter Paddon, Aug 11, 2005
 * Comment writing a page on yourself is at the very least pretentious - thats what user pages are for, you are free to write whatever you like about yourself there. But apart from that, my main reason for nominating the article for deletion was the blatant advertizing and POV.  Wikipedia is NOT a forum for free advertizing of your DVD products.  Allegrorondo 19:15, 12 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment In case you hadn't noticed, I have also voted for its deletion - I'm new here and didn't know about user pages until recently, or I would have done one of those instead. I'm not arguing that the page violated policy - I'm just commenting on the uncivil manner in which people have responded, which is also in violation of the policies here. Believe it or not, I wasn't trying to advertise my DVDs.. I just found something new and fascinating, and played with it. I should have done that in the sandbox - I can say that with hindsight - and I would have deleted the page myself if this deletion process didn't prevent that (another thing I didn't know about). So I 've learnt a lot about this place, and I've also learnt that there are some who are quick to heap sarcasm and derision where a simple "this is not allowed" would have sufficed. Let's just say it has soured my desire to participate in this any more. I'm just checking in to see if the page had been deleted, and hopefully it will be soon. Peter Paddon, Aug 12, 2005
 * 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.