Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wiki Leads


 * 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 speedily deleted  per G5 by. Non-admin closure. &mdash; KuyaBriBri Talk 22:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Wiki Leads

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Not notable - many of the sources advanced by the article's creator are either not reliable (some are self-published sources, Facebook and the like), others, such as "Private communication", are totally unverifiable original research.

None of the sources appear to be independent of the subject- the Salon source linked is a profile and a single, two line blog post. OSbornarfcontribs. 18:33, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions.  -- OSbornarfcontribs. 18:34, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The major problem to me is the lack of secondary sources about the subject. A Google search is tricky, because I'm getting a number of erratic hits where Wikileaks is misspelled, so I'm unwilling to say that the secondary sources don't exist. Until they're presented in the article, I strongly endorse deleting the article. If the secondary sources are presented, then I'll revisit that recommendation. —C.Fred (talk) 19:01, 7 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete Apart from the fact that none of us have been able to find reliable independent sources, I see also that the article says "It has published two collections of poetry and two collections of essays. Selections from the second collection of poetry, Works of Love, have been published on Facebook and other websites." That looks to me like a pretty clear announcement by the author of the article that the subject is not notable. There is also the remarkable edit summary "I don't know if he's famous, but apparently he dated my daughter!" JamesBWatson (talk) 20:53, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note that would be this edit. OSbornarfcontribs. 21:21, 7 March 2011 (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.