Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marcus Foy

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. The Placebo Effect 21:26, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Marcus Foy

Marcus Foy (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Delete - does not pass WP:BIO. No independent reliable sources. No indication of a large fan base or significant cult following. He has appeared on a couple of reality shows, but by way of comparison an article on another model from the same show, John Stallings, was deleted despite his being on multiple reality shows and having multiple reliable sources. Of course every article should be judged independently but still. Otto4711 03:14, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• This is one of those times where I do not mind a delete set forth by you, Otto. This article was an absolute mess before I got a hold of it, and, well, after that it was obviously only lowered to a Number 9-mess. I am still working on the Tad Martin and Dixie Cooney article in my Word document, as luckily, but not surprisingly, they have been written about extensively in more than a few books, and I didn't need another article on my need-to-improve list at this time, such as this one, when the subject of the article is not as notable as Tila Tequila, when it comes to Reality TV-star fame. Sure, this reality-television star should be based on his own merit, and that's what I'm also doing. It just doesn't appear as though much can be applied to this article in the way of note-worthiness. Flyer22 03:29, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• You could have just said "delete per nom"...  ;-) Otto4711 18:24, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, I know, but I wanted to explain, just as CrazyRob926 did. I'm not usually about simply stating one line in a deletion debate. I was also being a little humorous (though it wasn't funny) in stating that this is one of those times where I don't object to a deletion nomination by you, Otto. I didn't mean it as anything negative, of course. Flyer22 19:01, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.--Bedivere 22:12, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete I agree, there are no reliable sources, just because someone is seen on TV does not mean they are encyclopedic worthy. Plus the article still reads more like a resume then an article even after the hard work Flyer22 did, since there are no real good sources to use to write this article up to wikipedia standards. It needs to go. CrazyRob926 00:06, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Comment AfD nom was removed by user Ldinchetns which I reverted. --Sc straker 13:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. --Sc straker 13:13, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
• Comment. I feel that that user should be warned about having done that to a deletion debate, though Ldinchetns surely already knows that it was wrong to do. Flyer22 19:01, 17 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.