Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roberto Carrillo
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Grandmasterka 07:34, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Roberto Carrillo
Deletion nomination Fails WP:MUSIC, and WP:V, and WP:VAIN. This guy might actually be a musician, but there's no proof that he's an encyclopedically notable one, though there's considerable indication of a rich fantasy life. Apparently his performance venues are usually "informal concerts" in shopping malls "particularly in places where pianos are being sold" i.e. he goes to musical instrument stores and takes over the nearest piano. Sole external reference link is a gushingly positive review article (that stops just short of total adulation and then adds the small print that the critic is supposedly the most feared by classical musicians or something so I guess a 9/10 from her is like a 15/10 from anyone else) which strangely does not cite its original source but is hosted on a spammy article database which apparently anyone can submit articles to with minimal quality checks[1]. This external source is highly unreliable. The article claims that the subject is a direct descendant of a Holy Roman Emperor without any proof (apparently this makes him "royalty" though). The subject also claims noble titles which are from fantasy organizations and countries whose honours are available to anyone- see Grandmaster of the Chivalric Order of Cravant and Great Order of Vikesland. Oh and here's the totally unconvincing website of the Royal Society of Music, which like the Royal Society of Art is part of The Vikesland Ministry of Culture - these societies are supposedly presided over by Carillo. He is also named as the Minister of the Interior on the Vikesland website[2].Fantasy vanity hoax nonsense.
- Note: also see a related afd - Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Principality_of_Vikesland Bwithh 01:51, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Further note: Also see another related afd I have just opened: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Carrillo_Symphony_Orchestra Bwithh 02:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete vanity --Ling.Nut 02:28, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete due to lack of reliable sources that would support the subject's claims. Kudos to the nominator for a well-researched nomination. --Metropolitan90 02:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Thanks for the kind comment! Bwithh 02:31, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Transwiki to /dev/nullapedia, aka delete per nom. Utterly bizarre narcissismcruft.--Aaron 03:08, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The subject fails WP:MUSIC and WP:BIO even if the claims were verifiable. -- The Bethling(Talk) 03:44, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Non-Notable, No sources. --Don't mess with Scott. 04:25, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
DeleteThis might be one of the most self-indulgent vanity articles I've ever seen. Resolute 04:49, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
-
SpeedyDelete and block user On second thought, having seen the other related AfD's, and googling a bit, it this appears to be a pretty obvious hoax. Note that the "royal society of music" website is hosted on a tripod site with the same name in the URL as the single purpose user perpetrating this hoax. Resolute 04:58, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- I cant believe this crap isnt actually speedyable... Resolute 05:02, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete No Reliable Outside Source to Indicate Notability. Bo 05:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Not even a colorable assertion of notability. Why wasn't this nominated for CSD? Robert A.West (Talk) 06:21, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
-
-
- Response Because CSD doesn't cover articles like this: Here's general criteria 1: Patent nonsense and gibberish, an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content. This does not include: poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, badly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes.. There's also a claim for verifiable notability in relation to subjects links with Carrillo Symphony Orchestra (which is superficially a legit article) as well as the subjects links with Vikesland, which is currently under separate afd review and is being contested as a supposedly verifiable legitimate micronation [[3]], with at least one keep vote from an established wikipedia editor. That connection also stopped me from prodding. Oh hey how about that, it turns out that "Duke Roberto Carrillo of Cravant" is the Minister of the Interior for Vikeland too[4]. Bwithh 06:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Well, I still think it qualifies under A7, but I understand your conservative approach. Thanks. Robert A.West (Talk) 06:50, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Response Because CSD doesn't cover articles like this: Here's general criteria 1: Patent nonsense and gibberish, an unsalvageably incoherent page with no meaningful content. This does not include: poor writing, partisan screeds, obscene remarks, vandalism, fictional material, material not in English, badly translated material, implausible theories, or hoaxes.. There's also a claim for verifiable notability in relation to subjects links with Carrillo Symphony Orchestra (which is superficially a legit article) as well as the subjects links with Vikesland, which is currently under separate afd review and is being contested as a supposedly verifiable legitimate micronation [[3]], with at least one keep vote from an established wikipedia editor. That connection also stopped me from prodding. Oh hey how about that, it turns out that "Duke Roberto Carrillo of Cravant" is the Minister of the Interior for Vikeland too[4]. Bwithh 06:33, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- In my experience, anyone whose major achievement in life is claiming to be descended from some long-extinct mediaeval royal house is a candidate for deletion. Accordingly, delete. --Gene_poole 09:12, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
The same could be said of anyone who proclaims themself emperor, king or Prince Gene Poole. Roberto Carrillo is one this centuries best classical pianists, and I implore you to research before posting slanderous materials. Chris Beyette 216.36.157.25 17:55, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- What is your point? That Vikesland and its self-proclaimed Prince are not notable? Agreed. Proclaiming oneself does not make one notable; being proclaimed by others is what gives notability and verifiability. Robert A.West (Talk) 18:09, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
Comment Which has been done, certainly in Vikesland's case. They've been published.--Freddulany 20:53, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
-
- Why it's Prince Christopher I of Vikesland himself![5]. What a honour, your majesty! Bwithh 18:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps I should write my bio as former Prime Minster of Slobovia. I'll retire to Bedlam. Robert A.West (Talk) 01:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment: One of this century's best classical pianists? On which planet Mr Beyette? I've been a producer at the main public FM classical music radio station in Sydney - 2MBS - for nearly 2 decades. Our audience catchment is the greater Sydney region - population 4+ million - and I can assure you that neither I nor anyone else here in the real world has ever heard of the the prodigious Mr Carillo. This Vikesland business is rapidly descending into the realms of farce. --Gene_poole 12:06, 3 October 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps I should write my bio as former Prime Minster of Slobovia. I'll retire to Bedlam. Robert A.West (Talk) 01:17, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
- Why it's Prince Christopher I of Vikesland himself![5]. What a honour, your majesty! Bwithh 18:22, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nomination. MikeWazowski 18:43, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, this Vikesland crap has gotten out of hand. User:Zoe|(talk) 23:07, 4 October 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.