Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andras M. Nagy

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. --Coredesat 07:37, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Andras M. Nagy

Andras M. Nagy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

Article written by the subject himself as the user page for Andrasnm attests. Obviously, a serious conflict of interest. Beyond that, there is nothing notable here. The books are published by "Murine Press" which is owned by Andras M. Nagy [1]. The books have no sales rank at amazon.com. IrishGuy talk 22:29, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. --BozMo talk 22:30, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom and lack of independent coverage of this person. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:42, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination (WP:COI, non-notable). S.D. ¿п? § 23:41, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete - speedy per {{db-bio}} and conflict of interest. ✤ JonHarder talk 00:30, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
  • if everyone on Wiki must be a famous person (and already dead) then by all means, delete my entry. My books, however DO have a sales rank and I publish my own works and others (reprint editions). Is it the policy of Wiki to have someone else write this? and does it assure anything? is this a reason for deleting? How do you know that I will not get independent coverage soon? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Andrasnm talk • contribs) 12:21, 17 January 2007 (UTC).
Yes, it is a reason for deleting. It doesn't meet any of the criteria for inclusion. As to what may happen in the future, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. IrishGuy talk 18:08, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
You do not need to be dead, though I'm told it can help in certain fields. What is required is independent coverage by multiple reliable sources, to ensure verifiability and neutrality. Without independent coverage it's just a list of books. -- zzuuzz (talk) 15:47, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
The policy that indirectly addresses this is neutral point of view. It is nearly impossible to be neutral about oneself. The autobiography guideline is more specific, saying You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. Indeed, for these reasons it is preferable that the article is deleted and if notability can be established to fullfill the guidelines, recreated by a neutral editor. You are encouraged to contribute to articles that you do not have such direct ties or to suggest changes on the talk pages of articles where there is a conflict of interest. ✤ JonHarder talk 02:28, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Userfy unless verifiable proof of meeting the relevant section of WP:BIO is shown. Stifle (talk) 22:38, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:N, WP:AUTO and WP:COI. I think we would need third-party printed sources commenting on the value of his work in order to justify keeping the article. It would also need to be rewritten for neutrality by someone other than the author. EdJohnston 03:52, 18 January 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.