Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Jazz2jazz/Benjamin C. Sands, Jr.

 __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  No consensus. Reasonable positions on both sides, a relatively even split of opinion, and no strong weighting based on policy one way or the other. --RL0919 (talk) 14:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

User:Jazz2jazz/Benjamin C. Sands, Jr.
userfyed article on non notable person, its author has not edited it, (or any other article ) for 6 weeks Wuh  Wuz  Dat  14:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete-- WP:STALEDRAFT. -- E♴  (talk)  22:41, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. A bit too close to promotion to leave around untouched.  I see that Google is indexing it.  Undelete if someone wants to work on it some more and con provide third party sources.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 08:08, 5 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I have tagged it NOINDEX in case we decide to keep. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:40, 11 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. 6 weeks hiatus is just too short a time to consider deletion. -- Klein zach  00:17, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Again stipulating that six months is a reasonable period of time. Collect (talk) 19:20, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOTADVERTISING. The promotional nature of the draft ("Well seasoned in a variety of styles including Jazz, Gospel, Haitian, Latin American, Brazilian, Caribbean and Classical musics, he is an in-demand freelance musician") qualifies it for speedy deletion under db-spam. The sources in the article fail to establish notability in that none of them are reliable. There are YouTube videos and unreliable links that provide merely a passing mention in a list of names (e.g. this). A Google News Archive search indicates that Benjamin C. Sands is not notable. Because the subject is non-notable, because this violates WP:NOTADVERTISING, and because the creator is a single-purpose account created solely to post his résumé, the 6 months leeway given to userspace drafts should not be followed here. Spam should always be deleted, regardless of its having been here for six days, six weeks, or six months. Cunard (talk) 04:14, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep for now Per Collect, renominate when it is inactive for 6 months, 6 weeks is to short to be sure it really is a stale draft. NOINDEX should be fine till then. Monty  845  18:26, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The main argument for deletion is not that it's a "stale draft". The main argument for deletion is that regardless of the passage of time, Wikipedia should not be hosting non-notable spam for a single-purpose account. Cunard (talk) 23:28, 17 April 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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.