Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robin Haynes


 * 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   speedy delete. as author requested by User:Miniapolis. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  18:08, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Robin Haynes

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG or any evidence that the subject is notable for other reasons as might be allowed under WP:ANYBIO. Hacking Monsters is a one-page site (no working links) whose ownership is hidden behind Domains By Proxy. Ethical Hackers and White Hat Alliance are similar anonymous sites with very little content, their ownership concealed by Identity Protection Service. Hackers News Bulletin is one individual's personal website. None of these constitutes a WP:RELIABLE source. Googling turned up nothing useful. Msnicki (talk) 14:20, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:37, 21 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete seems like a vanity article. Before each person is notable, presumably the White Hat Alliance would need to be notable enough to merit an article for example. W Nowicki (talk) 16:28, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete per WP:CSD - an article that accuses a living person of being a computer cracker without impeccable sourcing comes under the remit of an "attack page" per WP:BLP Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   11:52, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Actually, the article talks about what a great guy with great motivations the subject is. I don't see it as crossing the threshold into WP:CSD. Cheers, Dloh  cierekim  00:58, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * regular delete unless convincing reliable sourcing is found. The article cannot be a vanity page and an attack page at the same time. Its tone is too laudatory, (almost braggadocious) for me to view it as an attack. Dloh  cierekim  01:03, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Note this Closing Admin:This article is paid for and written on a request from a Third Party the Editor is a Freelancer and edits in many sites including Elance.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Just noting for the record that I just declined a nomination to speedy delete this as an attack page. It does not appear to have been created with the intent of dispariging it's subject Beeblebrox (talk) 07:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity article. See also WP:NOTINHERITED.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 13:37, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete As per Ritchie333 and Msnicki and clearly Lacks WP:RS.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Hi, i wrote this article, feel free to delete it. I would, but I don't know how. I already removed all the content from the page. Neurosciency (talk) 14:23, 23 August 2013 (UTC)


 * blanking noted. I would do the job, but I already took part in the discussion. Tagging. Dloh cierekim  14:55, 23 August 2013 (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.