Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/André Douzet

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, per WP:SNOW. ··coelacan 13:56, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] André Douzet

André Douzet (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A somewhat obscure French author. Edits to this article have mainly been either by people boosting the subject, or by a detractor. With fewer than 900 Ghits to work from I am unable to work out what the article should look like - we are told by one side that he is a charlatan and by the other that he is a respected author, but I don't see any independent review of the competing claims. Guy (Help!) 12:45, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - Unless solid reliable sources can be found. Most editors to this article have WP:COI issues, and I could find no news sources, even in French. Jeffpw (talk) 12:54, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. French or not, the article must be verified with the usual reliable sources. If sources can be brought, I will reconsider. JodyB _{Roll, Tide, Roll} 14:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. The Bayerischer Rundfunk Das Geheimnis von Rennes le Chateau documentary may well have been low-brow and sensationalist, but it is something. On the other hand, no mentions that I could find on Libération, Le Figaro, or Le Monde. Namechecked at least in The Arcadian Mystique: The Best of Dagobert's Revenge Magazine and The Templar Revelation. If there weren't such blatant COI issues here, I might be inclined to the weakest of keeps, but Wikipedia is not a free advertising service and such a marginal figure is not worth retaining given the backstory here. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. No reliable sources. I checked the French Wikipedia and they have no article on him, so there are no sources to be found that way. There is a critique of one of Douzet's theories to be found online but that website is not a reliable source. EdJohnston (talk) 17:28, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails notability requirements. • Lawrence Cohen 18:35, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. No claim to meeting any part of WP:BIO, let alone sources to back up any such assertion. Sandstein (talk) 23:24, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. per pretty much all the previous comments. Not enough content to satisfy WP:RS, WP:V or WP:BIO. Is he still alive? I can't tell from the inadequate content whether WP:BLP applies or not! Possible WP:COI but that's not a reason for deletion. --AliceJMarkham (talk) 10:53, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Not even an assertion of notability. --Rodhullandemu (please reply here - contribs) 11:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I checked several journal databases for history and religion and find no mention of his name or his works. Google books provide more hits but they are either his books themselves or advertisements for them at the back of other (very similar) books. Not notable or veriable.Slp1 (talk) 13:14, 18 November 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.