Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald Lee Sharp

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was Delete. Rje 02:06, Mar 25, 2005 (UTC)

Ronald Lee Sharp
No evidence of notability (fails the Google test). --MarkSweep 23:53, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See also Talk:Ronald Lee Sharp. Based on that, it seems to be clear case of vanity (though perhaps excusable as a beginner's mistake), but there is also some evidence of notability (has written one book). --MarkSweep 03:43, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This was anexpiriment and not vanity as Megain suggests. To find my article you would have to enter the full name so it would not show up to anyone unless they were looking for it. I had wrongly assumed this was an open source of information since you offer no method to verify sources, which you should. I understand now it is a closed information source which "may" accept new information from open sources iff the "editors" feel it is appropriate. Thanks and please keep up the effort, I think it is a worthy project and may well evolve into something really great. RLS This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Mark, you need to put the VfD tag on the page (maybe your update was lost). -- John Fader (talk &bull; contribs) 00:03, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The servers are just slow. I always do a preview of the vfd tagging first and save it after I've created the VfD page and listed it. In this case, it took a while for the save to go through. --MarkSweep 00:17, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Abstain for now. I'm really reluctant to delete an article so new on the grounds of notability (cf Peter Palumbo, above).  Maybe we should have a "lets sit on this for a week and see if it grows into something worthwhile" tag. -- John Fader (talk &bull; contribs) 00:03, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * The VfD process will take a week at least, so maybe someone will rescue it if the subject is really notable. Meanwhile, it's only been the target of vandalism, which I didn't revert because it's not clear to me that this wasn't a further experiment by the original creator. --MarkSweep 00:17, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, could be speedied as a user test. Wyss 00:06, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I am not sure if giving it a week will accomplish anything, as the name does not appear to be notable at all. RidG (talk)  00:18, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, possible vanity. Megan1967 03:25, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, Ronald Lee Sharp, I am the author - delete the article and move on with your life.
 * Speedy delete as a user test according to WP:CSD&mdash;General #2, since the article author (135.104.20.14 or 135.104.20.13) indicated above that this was a user test. --Deathphoenix 20:14, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)