Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Howard (second nomination)

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. - Mailer Diablo 14:48, 15 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Christopher Howard

Seems like self-promotion and advertising for this person and his businesses. Note that this is a different Christopher Howard than the subject of the prior AFD. NawlinWiki 14:19, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. I am disagree in delete this Biography of an author who has in his salary several published books, being one of them considered like a Best-Seller by amazon.com (ISBN 1881233588, edition 14, 2006), which foments the investment in Central America. He has been visionary by more than 20 years in attracting tourism and investment in this region. The criteria for inclusion of biographical articles are our Wikipedia:Criteria for inclusion of biographies. --Willymora 22:51, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

— Possible single purpose account: Willymora (talk • contribs) has made few or no other contributions outside this topic.. yandman 11:39, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• Neutral for now There are two things to consider here: whether or not the article respects the neutrality and verifiability requirements of Wikipedia and whether or not the man is noteworthy enough for an article. The relevant question here is the latter:. Crummy writing and self-promotion are not welcome and should be cut o, but if the subject is kept. Pascal.Tesson 23:54, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, very poorly written and completely unsourced. From what I can tell from this aritcle, his notability is borderline. Regardless, this isn't what he deserves - if he is notable he deserves a much better, NPOV article. If he isn't he doesn't deserve and article at all. Thryduulf 10:06, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Keitei (talk) 10:23, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. Unsalvagable self-promotion. yandman 11:36, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete any article that refers to someone as a living legend deserves deletion on sight. Publicity article. Khukri ^{(talk . contribs)} 12:27, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• The reason that it reads like a publicity article is that it is a publicity article. It's a simple splice of content copied word-for-word from this copyrighted promotional blurb ("Copyright © 2004 Costa Rica Books - All rights reserved"), this copyrighted promotional blurb ("Copyright © 2005 Costa Rica Books - All rights reserved."), and this copyrighted article ("© Copyright 2001, IRED.com, Inc."), which is probably just parroting promotional blurb, by all appearances. This would be speedily deletable, if the speedy deletion criteria didn't include a 48-hour limit. Uncle G 13:18, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
  • But Uncle G, doesn't that mean it gets zapped anyway for being a copyvio? Alba 03:53, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Em-jay-es 13:56, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Alba. Vectro 04:02, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
• Delete this would qualify as speediable under the new G11. Pascal.Tesson 13:48, 12 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.