Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warren Wickman
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 of the debate was delete. Sango123 03:39, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Warren Wickman
Vanity page created by the subject. Non-notable bio. (was speedied, but some administrator thought that because he can write, and has a job, that makes him notable. Johndarrington 05:59, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep but cleanup. He is notable because he seems to have established a few collections and written a great deal of books. Authors are usually notable. Falcon 06:05, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete created by Wrwickman, making it probably a slightly more coherent than usual vanity page. Opabinia regalis 06:30, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Speedy was probably right. I can't find sources for the guy. Kevin_b_er 06:53, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, complete vanity. --Coredesat 07:31, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as vanity, but please people, CSD 101 textbook says, speedy deletions are reserved for articles that make no assertion of the subject's notability, *not* for articles where the subject is non-notable but notability is asserted. This is one of the most common misunderstanding of CSD criteria I've seen. Kimchi.sg 08:55, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Can you show me where the article says that he is notable? It reads like a CV --- it merely highlights some of the notablish things this person has done. I've done many things that I like to think are notable, and I've put them in my CV. Does that mean I can make an article out of my CV ? Johndarrington
- Highlighting notablish things is an assertion of notability. Debatable claims come here. CSD deleters and reviewers aren't supposed to evaluate those claims, that is our job. There are enough published works mentioned that overturning the CSD was clearly the right decision. The below comment by Andrew Lenahan is the sort of sound research that we should be doing - looking at the claims and seeing if they are 1) true and 2) important enough to have an article. GRBerry 15:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- So the answer to my question is 'Yes' --- I can post my CV as an article and it won't get speedied? That's bizarre! Johndarrington
- Highlighting notablish things is an assertion of notability. Debatable claims come here. CSD deleters and reviewers aren't supposed to evaluate those claims, that is our job. There are enough published works mentioned that overturning the CSD was clearly the right decision. The below comment by Andrew Lenahan is the sort of sound research that we should be doing - looking at the claims and seeing if they are 1) true and 2) important enough to have an article. GRBerry 15:04, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Can you show me where the article says that he is notable? It reads like a CV --- it merely highlights some of the notablish things this person has done. I've done many things that I like to think are notable, and I've put them in my CV. Does that mean I can make an article out of my CV ? Johndarrington
- delete not notable, unless I can see some real sources listed, should be deleted. Trm3 11:18, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Weak delete One published book which shows up on Amazon, but he's co-writer with two other people and the sales rank is abysmal (4,065,731th). Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 11:35, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Amazon will list any book for sale that has an ISBN number and is currently in print. Today it's easy to get a book "published" in the Vanity press. The one book that shows up is a little known publisher. Johndarrington
- Delete per nom. --Xyrael T 17:21, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per above. —Khoikhoi 02:47, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as vanity. LotLE×talk 06:15, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Vanity article, which also isn't particuarly notable.--Auger Martel 08:15, 17 June 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.
