Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nico Demonte

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was copyvio. Joyous 17:51, Feb 20, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Nico Demonte

Despite a great deal of editing and discussion, this still appears to be an only partly wikified band vanity article and I'm surprised it hasn't been previously nominated for deletion. No evidence of notability despite many varied attempts to obtain it. The main author has repeatedly resisted attempts to list the article on cleanup, and seems to edit mainly or perhaps only to promote this artist. Google gives me 237 hits at various sites but most and perhaps all can be explained as promotion. Andrewa 13:50, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  • Weak keep if they really have released an album, though I find this dubious. -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 20:37, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
    • The present article looks like crap, by the way, and should probably be shot. I may change my vote to delete if someone doesn't clean it up soon. -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 20:41, Feb 12, 2005 (UTC)
      • Why do I feel that "The present article looks like crap, by the way, and should probably be shot", should be a standard template? -- Cyrius|✎ 02:30, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • I change my vote to delete, as the article still looked awful before it got the copyvio notice, and no one is writing a temp page. -- Scott eiπ + 1 = 0 22:56, Feb 16, 2005 (UTC)
  • Requires serious editing by someone who is not starstruck with or involved in the band. Also verification by a neutral party. Otherwise, delete. Radiant! 23:54, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Amazon doesn't have anything by Nico Demonte. Non-notable, vanity, copyvio... there are quite a lot of reasons for vaporizing this article. --Idont Havaname 01:11, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic, possible vanity. Megan1967 02:23, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. I was about to VfD this myself. See my entry on the talk page for my arguments in more detail. neckro 02:55, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Hugely energetic bio when it comes to name-dropping, but the subject seems unnotable. Delete. -- Hoary 04:17, 2005 Feb 13 (UTC)
  • Delete, at first I wanted to vote keep, but skive the PoV and fluff and what have they done? Wyss 12:00, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • has survived two separate and strangely identical attempts on his life by his studio equipment [1] [2] (note the dates carefully) plus people "misunderstand his artistic vision" I say delete this article just for his own safety and sanity.
  • Delete for not meeting WikiProject:Music's guidelines for inclusion (as far as I can tell from reading the article, though it seems to try to imply more than it says) Tuf-Kat 03:53, Feb 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete for reasons stated. The guy tries to co-opt the site for self-promotion and then cries libel when his "article" is up for deletion? Sigh... - Lucky 6.9 18:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Follow-up comment: The entire history of this IP has been dedicated to this same self promotion. That and the threat of legal action was enough for me to list the IP on the VIP page. This has got to stop. - Lucky 6.9 18:47, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. -- The Anome 18:55, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Vanity, no more. Kiand 19:12, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. --Sillydragon 20:07, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. If perchance a non-copyvio version is written at /Temp, delete that too. —Korath (Talk) 22:51, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Libel. These Wikipedians below are creating a potential Libel against Nico Demonte. First, wikipedia has identified this entity using identifiable voices, likenesses, or descriptions of or concerning a person or a company. Wikipedia's comments by its users present the following potential libel case against the artist: 1) It would reflect badly on the character of the person or entity and 2) It could harm the reputation, diminish the esteem, respect or good will in which the person or entity's relevant community holds him, her or it. Insinuations made by Wikipedia's workers, drones, editors, and Users, might reflect badly on character and/or harm reputation of Nico Demonte based on insinuations (see below), insinuations, and statements that imply that there are unstated defamatory facts underlying such statements. Warning: Republication of a libel creates another libel and labeling such artist within said framework, including but not limited to "Vandalism" constitutes further libel. (Special thanks to the legal advice of Georgia Harper @ utsystem.edu)
What is the definition of libel?
The classic definition is:
"a publication without justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule."
(Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108) (reference: http://www.cyberlibel.com/libel.html)
    • Unsigned comment by User:67.167.86.158.

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.