Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andre Gift

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 Speedy delete per WP:SNOW and as probable attack page ("Gift was born in a trash can."). NawlinWiki 15:27, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Andre Gift

Obvious hoax. Article originally said he was born in 1994, which was changed to 1987, probably because I mentioned the unlikeliness of that birth year for a porn star on my PROD notice, which was removed. At any rate, this "cultural icon" produces only 105 unique Google hits, and only seven when "gay" is added to the search. -Elmer Clark 02:28, 19 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Agreed, obvious hoax. TJ Spyke 02:57, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete hoaxalicious. Danny Lilithborne 02:56, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Hoax. I sort of chuckled when I noticed one of the "film" links leads to the kids' book, but just because it was so inappropriate in the context. Edward Wakelin 03:26, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Strong delete, hoax, and very close to speedy delete g10 as attack page. NawlinWiki 03:40, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above - this definately appears to be a hoax. —Khoikhoi 03:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per WP:HOAX or possibly even Speedy Delete as per WP:ATK. Depends if this article was originally created to try and harm the reputation of a real-life Andre Gift. --BradBeattie 04:03, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Note that the article was started by a new account with no previous edits. --BradBeattie 04:04, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete obviously a non-serious hoax Mozzie 04:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy as attack page. I understand that it is not unequivocally clear that this is an attack page, but on this issue it seems best to err on the side of removing slander/libel, especially when the consensus is so clearly to delete. --N Shar 04:25, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I'd nominate to BJAODN, but only after the date of birth gets reverted back to 1994. (A twelve year old porn star???) --RoninBK_ETC 05:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. I was planning to nominate this article myself. -Kubigula (ave) 05:42, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete hoax, failed google search, (starred with Rob Schneider) would not object to speedy delete.--Lord of Illusions 06:09, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete useless. MonkBirdDuke 08:47, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete. There's some stuff in the article that's pretty clearly libelous. --JaimeLesMaths 09:24, 19 October 2006 (UTC) (Follow-up comment: I removed several unsourced and potentially libelous statements from the article as a precaution, so check the history. --JaimeLesMaths 09:29, 19 October 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.