Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl H. Flygt

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 of the debate was speedy userfy (see comment below), with redirects deleted. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 01:20, 4 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Carl H. Flygt

Non-notable: Google search on Flygt with "conversation theory" = zero hits. Francs2000 23:21, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

• Userfy. The article creator was Carl Flygt (talk • contribs). --GraemeL ^(talk) 23:24, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• The website at www.consciousconversation.com gives more information. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Carl Flygt (talk • contribs) 23:30, 3 November 2005.
• Delete, largely promotion for an as-yet unreleased book. If it's (relatively) commercially successful or becomes notable in its field, then an article would be warranted, but not before. Average Earthman 23:41, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• The article is an autobiography (with all of the original research and verifiability problems that that entails) for a person who does not satisfy the WP:BIO criteria, and whose claim to doing so rests upon things that have not yet happened. If Carl Flygt had made any other contributions to Wikipedia whatsoever, my opinion would have been "userfy", but he has not. One does not gain the privilege of a user page by the mere act of creating an account. One has to contribute to the project. Wikipedia is not a free user page hosting service. It's an encyclopaedia. Delete. Uncle G 00:48, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. The web site he points to promotes his lecture business, but does not establish notability. - Dalbury 00:56, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• I have speedy userfied this article. The author has a self-identified account where the article would be appropriate, he had no userpage (now he does ...), and, frankly, this article didn't have a hope in hell of not getting deleted. At least this way Mr Flygt gets to keep the content in his personal userspace. --fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 01:07, 4 November 2005 (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.