Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joep Verheggen

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 speedily deleted under WP:CSD G7. Elkman (Elkspeak) 15:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Joep Verheggen

Joep Verheggen (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Not sure if this person meets the notability guidelines or not. The references are all primary and the article looks like a cross between a resume and a Myspace page. Polly (Parrot) 02:01, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Keep it's a vanity page that looks like it was made by his mother, but he appears to be notable per Google search [1], [2], [3]; keep and edit heavily. JJL (talk) 02:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
The last two of those articles seem primarily to focus on ScienceDirect rather than Mr. Verheggen. Polly (Parrot) 02:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable per WP:BIO. References I found were from Elsevier which, though it is a very big name in publishing, is the organization he is associated with (through ScienceDirect). I'm sure the creator of the page had good intentions, but the extent of the vanity is a bit shocking. "References" which are the subject's own anecdotes? Unbelievable. Perhaps they missed the "encyclopedia" part when first looking at Wikipedia's site. --- Taroaldo (talk) 04:26, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:BIO.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 07:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • User:Aledevries I've removed everything we added. This was indeed a "vanity page" which we'd hoped to surprise the subject with for a special occasion, and we were very well aware that the page might at some point be nominated for removal - it wasn't intended to be permanent. We never expected it to be nominated so soon, though ;-) which is in itself a very encouraging signal about how serious Wikipedia is about quality. If anyone felt offended by this, then please be assured that this was never the intention.
  • Speedy Delete per G7. Author blanked the page. DarkAudit (talk) 13:19, 28 March 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.