Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jonathan Harchick

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. No point keeping this any longer. kingboyk 08:58, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jonathan Harchick

Proposed deletion is absolutely bloody useless for internet stuffs, being that some fan will inevitably remove it. Not a notable video logger, the only notability that the article comes up with is that he's been mentioned on other blogs. Woop-ti-do! Google gives 50 links for his name, Google news gives nothing. The only reason I found this was because I saw his sketch on Google Video, and thought, "I bet some webfan thought he should be on Wikipedia, and if so they're entirely wrong." We should just speedy this rubbish. - Hahnchen 00:08, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. M1ss1ontomars2k4 ^{(T | C | @)} 00:25, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:BIO. Kevin 00:28, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. DVD+ R/W 00:30, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. There's applicable speedy category for this. Pavel Vozenilek 00:47, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Dead end article.--Hezzy 00:50, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom Sarahgal 00:52, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Hahnchen I don't see any blood though. --Starionwolf 02:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Crazynas 02:06, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nomination. ~Linuxerist E/L/T 03:01, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Terence Ong 03:13, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Thetruthbelow^(talk) 04:22, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete see above jbolden1517^Talk 04:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. —Khoikhoi 04:32, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete being mentioned on digg doesn't establish notability. M1ss1ontomars2k4 ^{(T | C | @)} 05:33, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete. Fails WP:N and WP:BIO. ~Chris {^t_c^e_@} 20:27, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete Non-notable. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 20:51, 28 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Looks useless. -AMK152 03:29, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. --JChap 03:58, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not a speedy, I guess, because there's some quasi-notability implied... But if someone did it I wouldn't object. Totally non-notable. Grandmasterka 04:01, 29 May 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.