Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Freedman

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 speedily deleted by Kungfuadam under CSD A7. Sango123 17:48, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gary Freedman

There is no real reason given in the article as to why the author of the article is widely enough known to merit an article, why at this rate I could write an article on myself. File Éireann 21:35, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete per WP:NOT spam, article had been prod'd and both were removed without explanation. Also, this link should be noted. Yanksox ^(talk) 21:40, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, Mr. Freedman is not a notable person. Jacek Kendysz 21:47, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete and userfy - CrazyRussian talk/email 21:50, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete not a notable person. --Charlesknight 22:28, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • • Comment - and by "book" he seems to mean "blog entry"! --Charlesknight 22:31, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete per above. Danny Lilithborne 22:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Commment. I tried to find out what popularity the blog at http://garfreed.blogspot.com has, but Alexa aggregates all the pages at blogspot.com rather than listing individual blogs separately. Is there some other way to measure the significance or readership of the site? I'm raising these points because I think a well-read or influential blogger can be notable and I suspect that Gary Freedman might be. See Category:American bloggers TruthbringerToronto 22:56, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Commment I always think a good rule of thumb is the number of comments that a blogger gets - notable bloggers tend to get 100s of comments on each of their entries. The best I can find for Gary is 15 comments on one of his entries and if you look those seem to be generated by spamming other blogs. On the actual "novel" he produced, there are only 4 comments - 1 is from him, 2 says "please stop spamming other blogs and the last says "don't get it. What's criteria or methodology have you used to suggest to you that he might be notable? --Charlesknight 23:02, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above and WP:AUTO ~ trialsanderrors 23:57, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Textbook vanity page. Not the slightest shred of obvious notability. --Calton | Talk 00:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and Userfy NN vanity bio. Dismas|^(talk) 05:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Noticed the author has a comment on the Help Desk (not that it changes much), here it is- Wikipedia:Help Desk#Article re: "GARY FREEDMAN" -Goldom ‽‽‽ ⁂ 12:58, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for bearing with me. I revised the entry again to state expressly that the blog is a "notable modern example of the medieval Hebrew literary device known as melitzah." The blog is notable not because it is well known, it is notable as one of the few axamples of an existing literary device.--Garyfreedman 18:49, 22 June 2006 (UTC)--Garyfreedman 19:12, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

• Strong Delete NN - Mo-Al 19:20, 22 June 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.