Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greg Conway

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 16:18, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Greg Conway

Greg Conway (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unremarkable person fails notability requirements the article has been unsourced since creation, previous cleanup request diff resulted in the tag being removed after 3 months and request for verifiability being left unaddressed. Gnangarra 07:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. —Gnangarra 07:53, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Even if everything in the article was verifiable, it fails notability as little more than a university lecturer. --Mkativerata 07:42, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete It is probably a genuine sport now - lets see if we can put in a hoax article and see how long before they notice. Albany based teachers who are supposedly left wing political commentators and published authors who do not get onto the WA State Library catalogue are not genuine for a start - the library system usually would have caught up on such regional curiosity or anomaly - it is an outright hoax and needs to go to the bin soon SatuSuro 08:22, 7 October 2007 (UTC) Duets with himself? clues abound in the article as to its lack of anything that deserves anything but deletion SatuSuro 08:27, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Comment - a link provided by Zamphuor suggests a real person at Perth Modern School - still needs a delete SatuSuro 08:44, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete No evidence of notability and not verified. --Zamphuor 08:37, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete If the guy's been approached by political parties to run, one would expect to find Factiva hits for him reflecting newspaper coverage. None have emerged. I tend to go with Zamphuor, SatuSuro and the nominator on this one on article lacking notability and possibly an element of complete bollocks. Also possible BLP issues. Orderinchaos 11:05, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletions. —David Eppstein 17:57, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:N --Sc straker 02:00, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
• comment I removed the unsourced "teaching style" section, it was just silly, the rest is -of course- also all unsourced... Pete.Hurd 05:58, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Almost certainly not notable even if sourced. FWIW his students like him [1], so it is not a hoax. Only the notability is imaginary. DGG (talk) 09:48, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails WP:N and a host of others. Twenty Years 13:56, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete regardless of the truth or falsity of its unverified and likely unverifiable claims. —David Eppstein 21:17, 10 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable bio. Keb25 00:48, 12 October 2007 (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.