Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:BeauDamion/Beau Damion

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was Delete. kelapstick(bainuu) 12:21, 18 April 2014 (UTC)

User:BeauDamion/Beau Damion


Autobiographical, unsourced WP:FAKEARTICLE; Wikipedia is not last.fm. MER-C 12:20, 23 March 2014 (UTC)


 * This is a private page that has not been published yet. It is created by the artists management team with help from the artist on occasion. When completed the page will have source material listed. This hasn't been published because it is incomplete and does not yet meet the requirements to submit to Wikipedia. This should not be deleted since it does not meet the criteria of Wikipedia's deletion policy."Administrators have the ability to delete articles and other Wikipedia pages from general view" "Deletion of a Wikipedia article removes the current version and all previous versions from public view" This is not published, in general or public view. This was brought to our attention by the artist (received email and forwarded it on to us) This artist is under new management and we will be taking over the task to complete this page. Beaudamion (talk) 00:52, 24 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Who's we? Add abuse of Wikipedia for self-promotion to the list of reasons why this should be deleted. MER-C 04:21, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete - Although drafts are a valid use of user space, this one has gone stale. -- Whpq (talk) 03:43, 24 March 2014 (UTC)


 * "We" as in his new management. This is not self-promotion by definition (promoting oneself in a forceful way). This is being put together by other individuals. Not the artist himself. Also the completed page (updating and redoing much of the content listed) will be informative and biographical. There are multiple other "biographies" on Wikipedia of other musicians and artists in the industry that would then need to be taken down if you're basing it on the opinion you stated.

I agree the draft is stale, We didn't know there was a page in progress until the artist informed me of an email he received a couple days ago. Since he is under new management now "we" (the new management team) will be taking over this and completing the biography. Beaudamion (talk) 03:09, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * "We" is not an allowed use of an account. See WP:ROLE.  Accounts on wikipedia are for individual use and are not shared.  I suggest you look at drafting any article in Drafts space if multiple people are going to be working on it. -- Whpq (talk) 03:25, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Isn't the page in question a "draft" in the userspace? It says right in drafts that they can be created and not published within a userspace.
 * WP:ROLE "Such accounts are permitted only if the account information is forever limited to one individual." This account is forever limited to one individual. See username.

Is this going a little off-topic? Wasn't the original reason for this being flagged for deletion being: Autobiographical (which it is not), unsourced (which it won't be when the article is completed in the next week or so), and being self-promotional (it is biographical and for information purposes, not self-promotion). Beaudamion (talk) 20:54, 25 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Note to Admin: Despite the claim "the article is completed in the next week or so", diddly squat has been done.  -- Whpq (talk) 01:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Non-notable musician. jni (delete)...just not interested 16:56, 15 April 2014 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.