Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Etoll

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, discounting various devious signatures. Ingoolemo ^talk 06:03, 10 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Mike Etoll

Vanity bio, loaded with the usual hyperbolic language and unverifiable claims. 66.191.124.236 05:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per WP:BIO. Less than 100 hits on Google see [1]. His main claim to fame is Sewer baby which was nominated for deletion yesterday and does not seem to be notable outside Minneapolis. He has an IMDb page showing he was the art director of The Can see [2]. In short, he doesn't seem to meet Wikipedia's notability inclusions for biography. Capitalistroadster 05:47, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

• Keep User 66.191.124.236 calls this a "Vanity bio, loaded with the usual hyperbolic language and unverifiable claims" Do some EXTENSIVE research, not all of your research can, or should be done from a computer desk at home. Make some phone calls, walk around and examine things with a magnifying glass, and then (and only then) claim that these claims are unverifiable claims. (Yes it is me!)Samuel Payne 05:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete as per Capitalroadster. Marcus22 15:55, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. - Dalbury 18:33, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep if it's real, otherwise Delete Garr 23:58, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unless verified. howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 01:03, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete..vanity, commercial (wikipedia style doesn't look like a new user wrote it.Only one logged in user in all the edits to it and that user page has a external link)..Dakota ? e 01:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete unencyclopedic encephalon 02:03, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom Olorin28 02:51, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete nn vanity. *drew 03:19, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep No vanity here. As I personally know Mike Etoll, I can verify that none of the names or places cited have been exagerated. He is a major player in the Minneapolis artist scene.User:Mutai 23:59, 3 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. User:Mutai's only edits have been on Poosa, Sewer baby, Mike Etoll, and Image:Lunginsewer.jpg, and the delete discussions for the three articles. The Lunginsewer image has also been marked as a possible copyright violation. - Dalbury 11:23, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment. Dalbury, what's your point? Mutai edits and comments on what's important instead of spending his time as a professional critic. The Lunginsewer image is mine and I gave permission for its use. - User:Poosa 16:55, 4 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment I did not mark the Lunginsewer image as a copyright violation. Someone else did that. Wikipedia has strict rules on the use of images. If you are the photographer who took this photo, you must release it into one of the available licenses, preferably the GFDL, and show that in the Image:Lunginsewer.jpg page. - Dalbury 08:20, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep User:Booty(contribs) 22:59, 4 November 2005 (UTC)(This user's only edits are in the deletion discussions for the related set of articles of Mike Etoll, Poosa, and Sewer Baby, the last two of which have already been deleted. - Dalbury 00:55, 6 November 2005 (UTC))

• Delete. No verifiable claim to notability. --A D Monroe III 21:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Comment Dalbury is wrong about Sewer Baby being deleted. He's starting to make mistakes. User:Mutai 01:15, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment Ah, I see my mistake. I entered a reference to Sewer Baby instead of Sewer baby, which gave a red link and made me think it had been deleted like Poosa. - Dalbury 10:22, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Comment It seems as though Mutai and Dalbury enjoy the game here. Keep having fun at my expence (I have been suffering for the last 2000 years 20 minutes due to your squabbles and a heavy case of the gout). Mutai, Please be nice. Dalbury, Did you mention Poosa's deletion in an attempt to get under Mutai's skin? (Did You Mention Poosa's Deletion In An Attempt To Get Under Mutai's Skin, a new Sci Fi epic by the makers of the soon to be deleted Sewer Baby.)Mike Etoll 19:39, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Comment I do not fear an army of lions, if they are led by a lamb. I do fear an army of sheep, if they are led by a lion.

Alexander the Great, 356--323 BC

A D Monroe III states that there is "No verifiable claim to notability" in reference to my artical. What constitutes notability? Is my popularity strictly determined by how often my name appears on a google search? A D Monroe makes an absolute claim with this statement, a claim that is unverifiable and meaningless due to the simple fact that it is not true. -Mike Etoll

Welcome to Wikipedia, Mike Etoll. Have you read Wikipedia's policy on Verifiability? Your notability is determined by neither me nor you; by definition, it's determined by the public at large. If you can provide links or references to public acknowledgements of your accomplishments, then your notability is verifiable, and I'll change my vote. Without those references, it's unverifiable. It's that simple. (Note that acknowledgements made by you or on your behalf don't count as "public at large".) --A D Monroe III 21:49, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• • Hey AD, As far as I am concerned, we are both part of the "public at large". Is this statement untrue? Mike Etoll 14:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC) I can provide verification of my accomplishments for you, or else you can do a search on my name. For example,I created illustrations for the book Six Galleons for the King of Spain: Imperial Defense in the Early Seventeenth Century By Carla Rahn Phillips 1987, wrote an icon in '94 for an Orthodox church to work off my community service hours for breaking the law (I am now reformed). Things like this are hard to prove through internet searches, and may also seem insignificant but not only are they true, they are also uncommon accomplishments. The public at large will determine if things like this merit fame. All you are asking for is verification of my accomplishments, and this evidence exists even if it is not fully recorded on the internet. Mike Etoll 14:55, 8 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment Note that one or more persons signing (but not signed in) as User:Mutai, User:Marjon Leger, and Mike Etoll have posted from IP address 24.223.252.12. In addition, an anon user at 24.223.252.12 removed six Delete votes from Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sewer baby. This makes it appear that Mike Etoll is User:Mutai and that User:Marjon Leger is a sock puppet of Mike Etoll. - Dalbury 10:37, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Corrected error in which users posted from the cited IP address. - Dalbury 23:24, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment It may appear as though all of the users posting and editing here are the same, but this claim is not true. I have not deleted one post, or altered any of the comments here illlegally. Please trace my IP from this posted comment (if you wish) and in the future, please do a more thorough job investigating your subjects before you make claims concerning their validity. It is unwise to state something as fact unless you know that your statement is 100% true, and in this case Dalbury, you are wrong. -Mike Etoll
  • Comment Thank you for pointing that out. My apologies for the error. You are posting from IP address 65.25.215.205, as have persons signing as User:blorch, User:Tom Paulson and User:Samuel Payne. I recommend that you sign in to Wikipedia before editing, and then sign comments in these dicussions by typing four consecutive tildes (~~~~). Among other things, doing both steps will hide your IP address. - Dalbury 22:42, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• CommentThank you for posting my IP address. it was never my intention to hide it or to pretend that I have not posted under strange pen names. Thomas Coates Paulson III has an extensive internet history in his own right, but that's a horse of a different color.... Mike Etoll
  • Comment. Out of curiosity, is that Tom Paulson the one who is connecting from the same IP address that you are? - Dalbury 01:57, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Official Tom Paulson Website

Official Tom Paulson Blog

Where Tom was born

• Comment Yes Dalbury, I admit here for the first time anywhere that I am the Paulrus.

-Mike Etoll p.s. how exactly does the tilde thing work? Is there a problem with me commenting and signing my name as I have been? Thanks -Mike Etoll

• • Comment. Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages explains the signature business. - Dalbury 02:22, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

• keep This is obviously an interesting individual whom I'd like to study further. Jaguarmask 05:38, 7 November 2005 (UTC) (Note: This is this user's (contribs) first edit. - Dalbury (talk) 10:13, 7 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.