Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gavin Paul Carter

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. I won't bother with the alphabet soup - let's put this one out of its misery now. Black Kite 20:20, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Gavin Paul Carter

Gavin Paul Carter (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Little claim in article of meeting WP:Notability. 12 non-wiki ghits, none of which show notability; 0 gnews hits. Contested prod. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Delete; no Amazon or Bookfinder appearances. A2Kafir (talk) 16:33, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:41, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, fails WP:N Izzy007 Talk 23:28, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong (speedy) Delete: Blatantly fails WP:N...... Dendodge .. TalkHelp 17:06, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete very close to speedy - Fails WP:BIO, written like an essay and fail WP:V --Pmedema (talk) 18:56, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per above, fails the everything test. RFerreira (talk) 21:35, 30 May 2008 (UTC)
  • CommentGavin Paul Carter is about to become fairly well known,The Land of Grimney Website will be up and running in due course, and this will be fairly significant in time. If you delete him, he will not have another entry at wikipedia ever. Please consider this possibility before you delete his entry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.108.41.183 (talk) 03:45, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia 91.108.41.183! Perhaps I should introduce you to WP:CRYSTAL, WP:V, WP:OR, and WP:RS. If the article is deleted now, it can still be recreated later if your predictions come true, and for future reference, it'd be great if you'd remember to include comments in the actual discussion instead of above it. We appreciate interest and desire to contribute to our project, and we encourage you to study our policies and procedures. GO-PCHS-NJROTC (Messages) 14:43, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. The article contains forward-looking statements with regards to notability, but those have not yet materialized. JBsupreme (talk) 22:05, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete. As already pointed out, strongly fails WP:BIO, WP:RO, WP:CRYSTAL, WP:V, and WP:RS. May I also throw in a strong failure of WP:BK and WP:single-purpose account, along with strong suspicions of WP:AUTO and WP:COI. I'm starting to wonder if there are any policies or guidelines this article doesn't violate. He says the subject is notable because it's going to have a website soon?! Give me a break! I'd sure like to see this thing speedied off the face of our WikiPlanet as soon as a conscientious admin can get to it. Qworty (talk) 02:26, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Qworty has summed it all up rather well. nancy (talk) 17:01, 1 June 2008 (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.