Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dr. Daniel J. Garguillio

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 delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:59, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Dr. Daniel J. Garguillio

page had been marked prod, potential Vanity and autobiography Doc ♬ talk 14:03, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. I'm hesitant to decide whether it meets WP:BIO. The original author's username is DrGargoyle, so I think it is an autobiography. WP:VAIN says, "The key rule is to not write about yourself, nor about the things you've done or created. If they are encyclopedic, somebody else will notice them and write an article about them." --Gray Porpoise 14:31, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
• delete looks too much like an ad for my tastes. -Steve Sanbeg 16:44, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
• Do Not Delete Article is honest, including both negative and positive information on the subject, hardly like an "ad" or autobiography (making it quite doubtful that the origin author is the same individual as the subject). Garguillio is well-known in the demonological/occult field and should be the subject of a Wikipedia article at the very least.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.27.2.44 (Talk) (talk • contribs) 12:12, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment the above unsigned remark appears to be from none other than the originator of the article DrGargoyle. Doc ♬ talk 17:30, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete no verifiable sources Dlyons493 Talk 20:15, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment the above unsigned user, removed my previous comment and moved his/her "vote" to the top of the list.

Comment the above user under another ip has removed the last comment and removed notices from the namespace article as well as vandalising my talk page. Doc ♬ talk 23:14, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

• Userfy and Delete. The article is not referenced and verified by a reliable source per WP:V. However, seeing his line of business of the occult, it would seem impossible. Notwithstanding, he does not appear to be at all notable per WP:NN "Dr Gargoyle" scores 1850 Ghits, and "Daniel J. Garguillio" scores 46 Ghits. Other than wiki, there are only a few self-placed profiles and forum chats on the subject. "Daniel Garguillio" scores 0 Ghits.

In addition, Dr Gargolye should familiarise himself with wikiquette. He may not have been aware of the convention of placing messages at the bottom of a page, but I would say that the first message to Doc's talk was intimidatory, although he has since apologised. However, removiing tags like "unreferenced" or "NPOV" without having put the article right can be considered vandalism. Retaliation by changing comments on this page without proper notification (transparency) is also vandalism and unacceptable Ohconfucius 05:47, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

Comment The appology is accepted, and the vandalism has hopefully now stopped. There is both a message at the top of my talk page and a template to put new messages at the bottom of the page. Thanks for your input. Doc ♬ talk 14:43, 15 August 2006 (UTC)

• Delete -- per nom. GBYork 13:25, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete While in theory a biographical article should be verifiable, this one has been around unverified for a month and a half. No prejudice against recreation of an article that is not a autobiography or vanity article and is in fact verified from reliable sources, including use of independent reliable sources to establish notability for a biography. GRBerry 15:22, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not verifiably important. Medtopic 17:54, 17 August 2006 (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.