Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Oliver Coipel

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. IceKarmaॐ 01:11, 26 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Oliver Coipel

Definite hoax. Keep, now that DS has very kindly rewrote it. Quicksandish 01:21, 18 September 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete - agreed. Jack Meoffsky?! Oliver Coipel appears to be a mildly notable comic book artist.
  • Keep as rewritten. Tearlach 12:45, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy as nonsense/attack? --TM (talk) 01:37, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep DS' rewrite. --TM (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, boarderline speedy. Could be an attack page. Jaxl | talk 02:47, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep after rewrite. Jaxl | talk 20:58, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment - various comic book articles link to this article, or contain Coipel's name but don't link. Should be replaced with at least a stub with Coipel's professional info (available here:[1]). Chick Bowen 03:30, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy. Nonsense/nn. – AxSkov (☏) 05:14, 18 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep and expand. At the moment this article looks like a stub and hence needs to be expanded. – AxSkov (☏) 03:41, 20 September 2005 (UTC)
  • I've said it before - creating a nonsense article for a genuinely notable person, which then gets deleted as nonsense so that later iterations of the article will get speedied as "recreations of previously-deleted articles", is a very subtle form of vandalism. I just rewrote it; keep. DS 15:46, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
Don't worry, that criteria only applies to reposting the deleted version of that article ie. the exact same content. Even if this had been speedied someone would have been welcome to write a new, accurate version of the article without risk of it falling under WP:CSD. --TM (talk) 23:07, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep in light of DS's rewrite. Chick Bowen 18:31, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as rewritten by DS. Hall Monitor 21:33, 19 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep no prob. Alf melmac 19:23, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep ··gracefool |☺ 07:32, 24 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.