Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Berk

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 of the debate was delete. W.marsh 20:31, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] David Berk

Bringing to AfD as a result of this RfC. The article itself seems not to assert any notability therfore possibly a candidate for A7 speedy. However a {badbio} tag was removed on the grounds that the MobyGames connection conveys notability (here). The user who removed the tag is alleged, by another user, to be the subject of the article. MobyGames has an Alexa rank of 15,644 therefore outside, but not vastly outside, WP:WEB. No vote from me, yet - I am here to help resolve the RfC. AndyJones 18:59, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete, as non-notable bio. MobyGames may or may not be notable, but even if it is, it's not notable enough to confer notabilty back to Mr. Berk.--Isotope23 21:32, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, as a non-notable bio and a vanity page.--Unregistered user who pointed out that "flipkin" is Berk's handle in various places, 14:22, 11 February 2006 (JST) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 61.205.236.127 (talk • contribs)
• Delete per isotope's impeccable logic Ruby 05:29, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as vanity. Durova 08:17, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Redirect to Mobygames. - Hahnchen 12:51, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable, autobiographical, and may qualify as a vanity article. Gregmg 19:26, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep or Redirect to mobygames. Is there really another David Berk taking precidence here? The biography itself should probably be expanded to include other projects with his company. --WildKard 21:26, 14 February 2006 (UTC) (biased)
  • This user's first edit. AndyJones 21:40, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep but I am not sure if my vote counts : ) --Flipkin 22:55, 14 February 2006 (UTC) (biased)
  • Sure it does. Articles for deletion isn't a vote, as such, more an attempt to gain an idea of the community's consensus. Anyone is welcome to make comments here. Counting the votes is one way of demonstrating that consensus, though. At the moment, those votes are in favour of deletion: WildKard and lane are sockpuppets or new users and will be ignored. You are in favour of keeping, but unless you specifically deny it, here, everyone will believe you are the subject of the article, and may give your comments a little less weight as a result (see WP:VAIN for our policy on self-authored articles). All established Wikipedians here are voting delete or redirect, agreeing with Isotope23. AndyJones 10:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
    • Flipkin and I have had an exchange on my user talk page that details our individual concerns and confirms that he is, in fact, David Berk. Gregmg 14:10, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Mobygames is a great resource, I think it should stay. --lane —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.234.77.113 (talk • contribs)
  • User's first edit. AndyJones 10:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
  • No-one is suggesting deleting MobyGames, here. AndyJones 10:07, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as I feel the "non-notable" designation is subjective in nature. --Trixter 17:52, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. Skyraider 17:54, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. Redirect to MobyGames if necessary.66.129.135.114 14:47, 16 February 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.