Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Perfect (book)

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 delete. Joyous 00:40, Mar 6, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Perfect (book)

Delete. Looks like a vanity page - I find absolutely no references to it on Google except for what has been written here, and certainly nothing to indicate its alleged cult status. --khaosworks 04:27, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - Vanity from a high school creative writing class. When J.M. Wax gets an advance, maybe we'll reconsider. —ExplorerCDT 22:27, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Concur with Explorer, delete. Radiant! 10:25, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - concur with above. Nick04 19:43, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Save - I don't know where you looked, but I found numerous hits on this one; not just copies of Wikipedia, either. I've heard of it everywhere: chatrooms, forums, blogs... lots of personal pages. By the way, my username is NOT associated with it. _mich 16:12, 3 March 2005 (UTC)

• This is my search result. [1]. That's one hit, identical to the writeup. What's yours? Also, a look at http://jkco.net/about.html - which is on your User page, reveals that you, aka Mich, aka Jeff M. W. have the same initials as J.M. Wax. "Perfect" is also on that site. Nice try. --khaosworks 00:04, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • I see two. But you have to really trust a website called "attackofthetoys.com" —ExplorerCDT 00:07, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Save - I can attest to the validity of this book. It is being distributed on the internet in PDF form. I was referred to this story by a friend who emailed it to me. It is short and amusing, but valid none the less. If you want to be content nazis, head over to everything2. jeremy108
  • Comment/Warning: This is user's first edit. Possible sockpuppet. —ExplorerCDT 16:48, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Um..no Sorry for not being as cool as you, but I'm not s "sockpuppet", which from context I assume to be a fake account.jeremy108
      • partially correct...a fake account usually used to bolster someone's failing agenda (i.e. keeping a vanity article from getting deleted by "attesting to the validity of the book."). QED. As for not being cool like me, I wish I could s stutter when I say s sockpuppet. —ExplorerCDT 05:05, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Save - What's wrong with a little publicity for someone trying to distrubte their work? The description may be a bit vain, but certainly not worth deleting. pdf available at p9r.net/perfect/perfect.pdf .
  • Comment/Warning: This is user's first edit (Mrglass). Possible sockpuppet. —ExplorerCDT 16:48, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Terminate with Extreme Prejudice (Delete). Agree with XCDT, terribly written drivel on a personal webpage. Not notable, not encyclopedic, not worth the bandwidth it chews up. Oh, the vanity. —PtonJew06 16:41, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

See Talk:Perfect (book) where he admits that it's a vanity page. -khaosworks 18:29, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Speedy delete for vandalizing this page and block the Mrglass sockpuppet for doing it. Ditto the J. M. Wax "article." - Lucky 6.9 22:08, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete absent any evidence that this is anything but vanity. Gamaliel 22:13, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

• Delete - get rid of it and be done with the thing! Although I have found it quite amusing to watch people I know attempt to save this way, the suspense is killing me. _mich 13:33, Mar 5, 2005 (UTC)
  • NOTE: this counteracts the vote User:Michfreak placed above, which I will strike out. —ExplorerCDT 19:07, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)

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.