Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos Valdivia

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete --Allen3 talk 22:38, July 31, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Carlos Valdivia

Blatant vanity. -Aranel ("Sarah") 00:25, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Not so! He has become a Legend within the University and has had several articles written on him in such eminent journals as "AT501" He is becoming well known throughout Scotland and should have an entry inase people want to find out more about the legend. (comment by 129.215.45.63 (talk · contribs))

This guy is reaaly famous in Edinburgh Scotland. He should be on here. This page was not written by Carlos. (comment by 129.215.45.7 (talk · contribs))

  • Delete someone popular within a university is not encyclopedia material, if it is, why don't we all just write articles about our favourite lecturers? Even if he is notable, which he isn't, the article is very, very badly written, full of biased and vaguely racist crap. --Stevefarrell 00:47, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • By "full of" rascist crap you obviously mean "one line". That line being written in the presence of a Scot (who was laughing along with the author). Neither being Carlos Valdivia. (comment by 129.215.45.76 (talk · contribs))
  • How is he notable? What has he done? How exactly has he contributed to society? What is he? According to the article he's jst a student, big wow. Google picks up nothing that verifies a claim to notability, this is not an encyclopedia article, end of story. Delete, the sooner the better --Stevefarrell 21:33, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong delete, no verifiable claim to notability plus abuse of process. Dcarrano 01:29, July 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn vanity without redemption. -Splash 01:39, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn vanity. Wiki is not the place for jobsearching or personals ads. --Etacar11 03:45, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
    • Even if they are just silly jokes... --Etacar11 14:17, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Oh really? Then how come loads of you guys have your own pages? Whats that if not vanity my little friends? My god you guys really all need a sense of humour transplant.(Comment by 129.215.25.117 (talk · contribs))

You are confusing User pages with articles. We all have stuff about ourselves on our user pages. These are not encyclopedia articles. --Etacar11 21:04, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Yeah, fair enough . . . you win ;-)

  • I think so. keep it. (Unsigned vote by 129.215.45.114 (talk · contribs), first edit from this IP)

How would you know? (Comment by 129.215.25.117 (talk · contribs))

  • Delete It's just a job seeker. --rob 05:27, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

"Just a job seaker"? What kind of person is going to give someone who calls himself "galactic overlord" a job, you Pleb! (Comment by 129.215.25.117 (talk · contribs))

  • Delete Not notable, pure vanity (even if not written by himself), he should just post his CV off to various agencies if he wants a job, as Wikipedia is not a recruitment agency. Phantomsteve 17:05, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Get over yourself, its not a CV its an encyclopedia entry about a notable guy! (Comment by 129.215.25.117 (talk · contribs))

  • We need this entry! I am ready to get as many votes as it takes to keep him. In fact I am am going to run my multi agent simulation toolbox to just keep voting for him.
    • Threat of sockpuppetry by 129.215.45.43 (talk · contribs). Has anyone blocked him? As for me - delete - vanity at best, intentional vandalism at worst - Skysmith
    • Redundancy. All vandalism is intentional. Though, in the absence of any damage (certainly none was intended), this isn't a case of vandalism anyway. So no harm no foul. Hope you don't mind. I changed a typo in your bullet point. ('by 129.215.45.2 (talk · contribs) Skysmith 08:18, 19 July 2005 (UTC))
      • Sockpuppetry (ie. voting multiple times by whatever method, one of them as per 129.215.45.43's statement above) is not favored here. That constitutes potential disruption, therefore vandalism - Skysmith 08:18, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
        • But that wasn't what you were refering to. Nor has anyone done it. Nor will anyone. (Unsigned comment by 129.215.13.83 (talk · contribs))
  • I like the guy, employing him right now... seems to be really smart ppl up there in edinburgh. wouldn't quite go that far to call him galactic overlord---but rockstar programmer he definitely is. Go Carlos!!! (Unsigned comment by 129.215.37.21 (talk · contribs))
  • Does anybody here even know what the term 'vanity' means? One of the nice things about the wikipedia is that you don't have to fake it as you go. You're mere key strokes away from actually knowing what you're talking about. (by 129.215.45.2 (talk · contribs) again - Skysmith 08:18, 19 July 2005 (UTC))
    • Depends on whether you are Valdivia himself, one or more of his friends or someone who intends to mock him. And as far as Wikipedia is concerned, meaning of the word is less imporant than policy in Wikipedia:Vanity page. I suggest you get a LiveJournal account instead - Skysmith 08:18, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete I'm glad that he's a cool guy and a good programmer. Fortunately there are a tons of cool programmers and more is needed to be notable. --Vizcarra 22:12, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
    • But he clearly is notable. There is even a wikipedia entry devoted to him! (Circular "logic" by 129.215.45.125 (talk · contribs). Only edits to this VFD. I wonder how many WP mirrors have already absorbed this - Skysmith 07:48, 20 July 2005 (UTC))
      • It isn't so much circular reasoning. More of a closed curve really. ;-) (Unsigned comment by 129.215.16.39 (talk · contribs))
  • Let Valdivia keep his place in Wikipedia history. If not here then how about BJAODN? (Unsigned vote by 129.215.135.52 (talk · contribs))
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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.