Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Larry McHugh

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. WjBscribe 02:28, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Larry McHugh

Larry McHugh (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Contested prod. In this article's brief history, it's been tagged {{wikify}} and had the tag deleted by the (SPA) creator without any explanation or improvement to the content; been tagged {{notability}} and had the tag deleted by the creator without any explanation or improvement to the content; been tagged {{stub}} and had the tag deleted by the creator without any explanation or improvement to the content; been tagged {{uncat}} and had the tag deleted by the creator without any explanation or improvement to the content; and finally been tagged {{prod}} and had the tag deleted without any explanation or improvement to the content. Consequently, bringing it here earlier than I usually would since there seems to be no sign of the creator or anyone else improving it. This reads like an advert and appears unimprovable, and although the name's too common easily to search on, googling the name plus the assorted album titles brings up no non-trivial sources I can find. (In light of this article's history, I fully expect the AfD tag to be deleted without explanation as well.) I'm giving extreme benefit of the doubt and not (yet) nominating the other inhabitant of this walled garden Diamond Seven — iridescenti (talk to me!) 19:48, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Listed Diamond Seven for deletion only to find it has already been deleted: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Diamond Seven. Now speedy candidate. Decreases notability of this article further. |→ Spaully₪† 20:22, 4 May 2007 (GMT)
  • Delete No assertion of notability, fails WP:RS. Caknuck 20:10, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The facts stated in the article are true, despite your own personal opinions to the contrary. If you are biased against someone because of their religious beliefs, maybe you should get a job in the main stream liberal media, and give up your pretense of being an "impartial editor". Good luck in your quest in stamping out any traces of Christianity...watch out, a bigger shoe is about to drop. Dewey96 20:04, 4 May 2007 (UTC)dewey96
    • Comment I believe I could survive it. This isn't an "attack on your religious beliefs", this is the deletion of a page on an artist I'm completely unable to find a single reliable source or evidence of notability for. If the sources exist, add them to the article and the article will be kept - it's as simple as that — iridescenti (talk to me!) 21:01, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I can't seem to find any reliable sources on him as an artist (writer or musician). And I want to mention that this as nothing at all to do with your beliefs, Dewey96, this is about encyclopedic content.--Helm.ers 21:05, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, neither verifiable nor notable. Dewey96, please check your persecution complex at the door. --Dhartung | Talk 22:26, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless properly refed He may well be an admirable person who has made significant contributions, but alas this article offers no evidence of this at all in terms of references. A new article with proper references could be added and reconsidered. NBeale 18:47, 9 May 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.