Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:EdLudbrook


 * 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. Blatant self-promotion. See WP:CSD.--Aervanath (talk) 05:55, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

User:EdLudbrook
NOTE: See also Conflict of interest/Noticeboard/Archive 25 for related information. Soundvisions1 (talk) 21:21, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Mainspace article was deleted (Ed Ludbrook) for blatant advertising and seems to have turned up on their user page. This MFD also includes the image File:061 34.jpg which is an image of the user and was uploaded by the user. This users main edit history shows work to deleted articles, his userpage and inserting his "information" into the Entrepreneur article. (dif) They also placed links to their business website in the Intrapreneurship article. (dif). Soundvisions1 (talk) 20:25, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Definite Keep for the image which btw is not tagged therefore should not even be discussed (actually it should be moved to commons under a more descriptive name). Edward Ludbrook does have an article which I attempted to clean up. From a Wikipedia point of view notability is there as apart from his books he was a regular columnist in one of the British broadsheets in the 90s. I would need to find a reference for that though as his own edits do not include any reference to that. Neither does the existing article. As far as the userpage is concerned. The use is not blocked and might come back to edit outside his COI. I'd be happier in blanking the page rather than deleting. Also I'd be happier having his edits around under a GDFL licence than not. Agathoclea (talk) 23:03, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just to clarify - when this nom was made the image was only used on this userpage so it was included here incase this userpage was deleted so as to not leave behind an orphan image. The image in now being used on Agathoclea's userpage and in the second Edward Ludbrook article. Also the core MFD is for a mainspace article appearing in userspace, it has nothing to do with the user being (or not being) blocked or being (or not being) currently active. Soundvisions1 (talk) 01:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep as a c.v. within WP limits for useropages. No bluelinks to outside sites, hence hard to delete as mere advertising. Collect (talk) 11:25, 23 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - blatantly promotional, written as a Wikipedia article (and drawing heavily on the deleted spam); beyond the bounds of tolerability. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  22:29, 24 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep scrapes by as acceptable WP userpage. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 23:16, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment and questions: I am confused as to how a mainspace article deleted as G11 can be duplicated on userspace and again on mainspace and be thought of as acceptable? Clearly this is a policy violation in either location, Wikipedia is not a soapbox "applies to articles, categories, templates, talk page discussions, and user pages". Number 4 is "Self-promotion" which includes "Creating overly abundant links and references to autobiographical articles is unacceptable" and number 5 is "Advertising". If anyone can honestly tell me how having a mainspace article and a near duplicate userspace that contains links to "Ed’s website/Blog", "Ed’s Leadership company" and Ed's "100% Success Institute" is not blatant advertising in a COI-self created article please so so. And explain how making un-sourced (Other than the actual user as a source) statments such a the use of Ed's book and techniques "all produced industry leading results" or that he "reached the top position in his next company" or that "he is Europe’s leading speaker and trainer with more than 2 million books and audios sold in 20 languages" are not soapboxing? Soundvisions1 (talk) 04:21, 28 January 2009 (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.