Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeremy Danial Boreing

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. Mailer Diablo 00:12, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jeremy Danial Boreing

Vanity page, doesn't meet WP:BIO DVD+ R/W 02:54, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete as nn. What shows up in google demonstrates the article fails WP:BIO. Mikker ^... 02:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep working on a somewhat notable movie project[1]. Adrian Lamo ·· 02:59, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. Blnguyen 03:01, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. --Terence Ong 03:12, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom.,,,,,Ariele 04:14, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Adrian; notability confirmed by IMDB entry and Hollywood Reporter. Monicasdude 05:37, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable enough as of yet Avi 00:52, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete; come back when he's done something. Melchoir 06:17, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, who knows whether his movie will sell fifty or fifty million tickets? Anyone can get an IMDB entry. When the movie is released and has some critical reviews, then a Wikipedia article might be in order. Not before. Incidentally, might be worth a userfy. Stifle 11:56, 14 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Agree with Stifle. User:Mrhigg is the subject (either that or this image is a copyvio). He might like to userfy this page. AndyJones 22:44, 15 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.