Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Martin Marini

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, almost speedily. Kusma (討論) 15:57, 22 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Martin Marini

ATTENTION! If you came here because somebody asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a ballot, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus amongst Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. We have policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting heads. You can participate and give your opinion. Please sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Happy editing! Note: Comments made by suspected single purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username|UTC timestamp [optional]}}

Article subject does not meet the WP:BIO guideline criteria. Delete.--Isotope23 17:00, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - cited as counsel in some cases reported in Singapore Law Reports.-- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.120.166.13 (talk • contribs).

• Disagree with Isotope23, article subject meets the WP:BIO guideline criteria. Keep.--Mad Cow Disease 02:37, 15 September 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: Mad Cow Disease (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic..

• Comment out of curiousity, which criteria of WP:BIO do you assert Mr. Marini meets?--Isotope23 12:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• [Moved from the discussion page]: Comments This man was my pro bono lawyer. He did my case for free. I am Spartacus too! 16:16, 14 September 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: I am Spartacus too! (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.
• Article subject returns 5 hits in Singapore Lawnet [1]. Keep--One Legged Chicken 03:19, 15 September 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: One Legged Chicken (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.
• Keep per comments.--Singaporelawyer 03:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC) — Possible single purpose account: Singaporelawyer (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.

• Comments the comments above assert that he apparently is a rather nice chap, but they don't show how he meets WP:BIO.--Isotope23 12:25, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:BIO, WP:NN, WP:V, and WP:RS. (See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marjorie Wee.) (Closing admin: Please watch for socks.) -AED 07:26, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as per nom and as above. Onebravemonkey 12:21, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Restoring my delete comment that was removed by Singaporelawyer. --cholmes75 ^{(chit chat)} 13:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Singaporelawyer has been disrupting the AfD at Marjorie Wee as well. Interesting to note that all keep opinions so far are from users registered over the last 2 days...--Isotope23 15:06, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom and AED. --Aaron 17:40, 15 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Does not meet the notability threshhold requirements of WP:BIO. --Satori Son 06:32, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nn-bio.--Vsion 00:07, 20 September 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.