Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Ulmer

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 DELETE. — JIP | Talk 07:40, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] John Ulmer

Delete. Self promotion and non-notable. 64.108.199.247 23:50, 5 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Agreed, this is a vanity page by a person who is not notable, and is, in fact, a self-confessed Wiki vandal (see link 1). This biography has been posted as the result of an IMDb feud with another IMDb user and a "who's more important" competition. See: [1] John Ulmer, who claims to have once been employed for a brief time by CNBC Studios in London ought to be deleted as typical and non-notable, and John Ulmer, the unrelated but credited actor should be retained. At the very least, John Ulmer allegedly formerly of CNBC should be moved to the user's ([2]) own user-page, as per Wiki Vanity article policy. User's claims about Roger Ebert, Roger Avary and Quentin Tarantino, and his own film scripts are unverifiable. 203.49.137.60 02:41, 6 October 2005 (UTC)

Hi Shamrock! Or should I say Monroe?

Glad you could contribute to the page's deletion process.

As for the "unverifiable" claims that my content has been read by Ebert and Tarantino, et al...care for me to scan and upload their feedback to me? Which include autographed books?

And would you like me to scan over my legal papers pertaining to my employment/internship at CNBC on Fleet Street in London, England?

Cheers, Monroe! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 172.136.94.27 (talk • contribs) 02:25, 7 October 2005 (UTC).

• This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. No opinion. —Cryptic (talk) 16:20, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per nomination. Non-notable. Although Ulmer has an imdb.com listing ti appears he has only played in minor roles. Eddie.willers 18:00, 17 October 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.