Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steve Wilk


 * 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. Michig (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Steve Wilk

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable individual lacking ghits and Gnews. CSD removed by sock puppet. In addition, article for creation submission refused. See. Should be speedy. red dog six (talk) 04:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment - Googling this name pulls up endless links to references. Biographies of living persons are welcome by wiki. Reviews and credits are found in a search. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tethria (talk • contribs) 05:00, 2 May 2013‎  User (article creator) has been blocked as sockmaster.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  15:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * None of substance or apply to the correct person. If you can find them, feel free to add them to the article.  red dog six  (talk) 05:05, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * What do you mean "none of substance or apply to the correct person" This statement is grammatically incorrect and does not make sense. Please reword your statement. All the links provided take me to pages where I can see the name and picture, there for verifying this person. You need to prove that is does not pertain to the article listed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raddman26 (talk • contribs) 05:18, 2 May 2013 (UTC)  — Raddman26 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.   Blocked as sock of Tethria (article creator).  czar   &middot;   &middot;  15:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - (You forgot to add and your mother dresses you funny.) Add a that between the or and apply. You do not seem to understand the basic premise that the references must meet Wikipedia criteria. The references associated with the article are self-published and do not meet the definition of secondary. I'll say it again, if you can find references that work add them to the article, otherwise the article fails to meet Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. Currently there is nothing that meets the criteria.  red dog six  (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Oppose/Keep per above. Alex2564 (talk) 05:23, 2 May 2013 (UTC) Blocked as a sockpuppet of User:Ezekiel53746 ~Amatulić (talk) 22:42, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please explain how the provided "references" meet the criteria for "secondary" references. Where are the independent, verifiable references?  red dog six  (talk) 17:52, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:24, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  czar   &middot;   &middot;  05:25, 2 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep - Additionally, when I google “Steve Wilk” the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 8th and 10th links all point toward the subject in question. Credits on IMDB have to be screened as well. I search for the same name in it pulls up books and reviews, the same links the article author posted on the page. Pictures to match too. I vote to keep the page open, however it is not my work so this is the end of my argument. Good luck! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raddman26 (talk • contribs) 05:28, 2 May 2013 (UTC)   Blocked as sock of Tethria (article creator).  czar   &middot;   &middot;  15:32, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comment - you do not seem to understand the basic premise that the references must meet Wikipedia criteria. The references associated with the article are self-published and do not meet the definition of secondary. I'll say it again, if you can find references that work add them to the article, otherwise the article fails to meet Wikipedia criteria for inclusion. Currently there is nothing that meets the criteria. red dog six  (talk) 17:33, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: Doesn't seem to meet notability guideline for creative professionals; only related sources I can find are the author's personal website, bookselling sites, and an IMDb credit list. – 296.x (talk) 05:44, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Seems to be a promo article with plenty of self-generated sources.  Robert McClenon (talk) 22:36, 2 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete. Closing admin, note the SPA contributions above (two so far, both blocked socks). This article has zero references of value. References that are available are poor: self-published sources, user-generated content, nothing I can see in a brief search that indicates there is any reliable secondary source independent coverage as required by WP:GNG, WP:V, and WP:RS. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:59, 3 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete The two refs given are not reliable independent sources. The books appear to be Amazon Kindle editions - that is, self published. The games side probably isn't notable. The one mentioned hasn't achieved an article here yet. Having powerful friends doesn't make one notable. Nor does being involved in politics at an unspecified level. Peridon (talk) 18:08, 3 May 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.