Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Lyon

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. Debate-wise, the delete arguments have gone relatively unanswered except for Servand's, but Servand's comment seems to suggest that Lyon's websites are notable, not Lyon himself. It's not overwhelming, but if the subject requests deletion, we should only keep the article if notability is clear. Mangojuice^talk 20:02, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Lyon

Not notable, self-promotional article. The subject of this article is a law student whose claim to fame is being one of numerous plantiffs in a lawsuit and creating a fan site for a TV show. This article was originally speedily deleted by another admin and myself. I've recreated it for this AfD, per a discussion with Servand. Alabamaboy 15:42, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Note: Unsigned comment made by 69.169.206.59, signature inserted by --Alabamaboy 13:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per above.--Alabamaboy 15:44, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, the notability of this individual is not simply "being one of numerous plantiffs in a lawsuit and creating a fan site for a TV show" but for the use of websites that gathering legal filings from notable legal actions to provide internet users with accurate and detailed information related to those lawsuits. Servand 15:48, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, article subject does not meet WP:BIO. The only references in the article that are not from the subject's own websites are 1 MTV news article and a small article from a real estate news source. Neither are what I would consider reliable sources and in my opinion this falls well short of the "multiple non-trivial" portion of WP:BIO. I also disagree with the contention that the subject has any notability based on his websites as neither site meets WP:WEB. The fact that it is a WP:AUTO article doesn't help either.--Isotope23 15:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment and vote - while this article should be deleted, there are Mark Lyons who deserve WP articles - if the current aricle is deleted, an article on this one ([1] [2]) would be well worth having. Grutness...wha? 00:28, 8 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Non-notable. Hi Dotorg! InvictaHOG 02:26, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete There's no need for an article about me. I was shown, by Dlyons493, how to create a user page when I first created an article about myself a year ago (which was speedy deleted). I have moved the new content to my user page. Besides, I'm horribly unpoplar; heck, I'm sitting at home alone on a Friday night. Marklyon 03:01, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, I agree with Servand. Anonymosity 8:31, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, This is a notable entry, and I believe there's a bit of a conspiracy to delete the article. First, the person who orginated this vote for deletion falsely says that the article is self-promotion. Mark Lyon didn't originate the article, nor edit it. He suggested things to add in the discussion, which is proper. Then, he votes for his own article to be deleted, probably because he doesn't want the publicity, and that's not a reason for deletion. In fact, that's so out of the ordinary that it's suspect. Not to mention, look at all the traffic on the article, especially lately.--Trypsin 04:20, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment, there is no conspiracy, the subject simply doesn't meet WP:BIO guidelines, despite the plethora of keep opinions here.--Isotope23 15:14, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, this is a pretty good start for an article, and this article would be handy for someone studying the Sony BMG/rootkit case. Xizer 04:32, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Lankiveil 04:40, 9 September 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Is it still considered to be self-promotional when Mr. Lyon had no part in actually making the article? Because that seems to be pretty much contrary to the definition. --81.168.92.63 12:49, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Note: Actually, Marklyon did create the article and, as per his vote above, says it should be deleted. In addition, this isn't a vote but a discussion. While anonymous editors and editors whose contributions are totally limited to this AfD are welcome to comment, do understand this isn't a simply vote tally. Attempts to "stuff the ballot" don't apply here. --Alabamaboy 13:27, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

If you trace through the history, he created an article in 2005 when trying to make a user page. It was speedily deleted, and a year later someone else named Servand recreated the article and added a bunch of content. This has nothing to do with Marklyon creating an article about himself, so argue notoriety, not that's it's autobiographical. None of the current content came from Marklyon.--Trypsin 11:31, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

• delete No way this guy is notable.--206.165.32.108 14:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Isotope23. —dustmite 02:03, 17 September 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.