Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Aaron Kelley
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-03-09 09:48Z
[edit] Aaron Kelley
Autobiographical vanity page, IMHO. The author was (I'm almost certain) using sock/mock/meatpuppets to remove speedy deletion tags - but a claim of notability was made, making it ineligible for speedy deletion. Delete as non-notable per WP:BIO. RJASE1 Talk 17:00, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per the individuality section of WP:NOTE - the only source provided is the subject's MySpace page. --Nevhood 17:42, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Weak Delete - as Nevhood says, the only link is to the subject's MySpace, hence no evidence of multiple non-trivial coverage in independent sources to establish notability per WP:BIO. Delete unless appropriately sourced by the end of this AfD. Walton Vivat Regina! 17:52, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete vanity/promo. Wile E. Heresiarch 19:18, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - According the article, the individual in question is well known to those who belong to a subculture in a particular locale, but after reading the external links given, that claim seems dubious. Writing a single Op-ed piece for a subculture magazine, or having supplied several sentences of quotations published in similiar publications, doesn't meet the bar raised by WP:BIO; otherwise anyone could claim that getting their own Op-ed letter published in a newspaper would qualify themselves for inclusion. Like the nominator for deletion, I too am suspicious of the circumstances of the anonymous deletion of the original db-bio tag (the only recent edit from that IP address), and several brand new accounts were apparently created for the sole purpose of defending or working on the article. - Itsfullofstars 19:38, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Non notable individual. Article fails WP:A. Probable vanity, especially since his "friends" are jumping in to defend the article. Resolute 20:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. Well, the article's author just made a legal threat on my talk page - my first on Wikipedia! RJASE1 Talk 21:28, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
My name is Aaron Samuels and a fan of Aaron's. You state you are 'almost' certain Mr. Kelley is using mock _____ to comment on this page, I am most certainly not one of them. I have been anticipating an article to be found on him in Wikipedia, and am glad as a user he is finally here. If you delete this article, you will be using bad judgement, and it is a shame. The term 'used for vanity' is extreme, and would be considered defamation in legal terms. Please carefully consider your words and the way you choose to make claims to people. This is a professional forum, I hope, and let's carry ourselves professionally and with dignity. These claims are false—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.21.73.90 (talk • contribs).
- Delete I'm with Itsfullofstars, this is full of single-purpose accounts editing an article of dubious notability. -- Scientizzle 22:13, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- 'Delete There is one reliable online sources, the W. Blade, but he's only mentioned in a column. I am not sure about db bio, because it does assert notability. But the look ofthe article would seem to explain why it wasnt wholly unreasonable. The spa's are no reason to delete--we just ignore them. I saw the comment, and advise RJASE not to take it as a serious threat.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by DGG (talk • contribs).
- Yes, the SPAs are not a reason to delete, just a reason to doubt the unsourced claims within the article and this AfD. In any case, the article clearly doesn't meet WP:V or WP:BIO. -- Scientizzle 17:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Incidentally, notice that the comment piece in the first link describes Mr.Kelley as a social worker. EliminatorJR Talk 18:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, the SPAs are not a reason to delete, just a reason to doubt the unsourced claims within the article and this AfD. In any case, the article clearly doesn't meet WP:V or WP:BIO. -- Scientizzle 17:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete unless sourced by the end of this AfD. Googling "Aaron Kelley" gets 938 GHits, and as far as I can see ALL of those are about someone else, mostly an Elvis impersonator called Jamie Aaron Kelley (who incidentally *hasn't* got a Wikipedia article). Even if it's sourced, the article badly needs a rewrite as well - the last section reads like a fluff piece from a celebrity magazine. EliminatorJR Talk 23:27, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- Delete - fails WP:BIO. Being quoted in the paper isn't the same as being the subject of an article. - Aagtbdfoua 00:18, 9 March 2007 (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.
