Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William M. Murray: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
Encephalon (talk | contribs) m adding link |
|||
Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
*'''Keep''' - search "William Murray & Associates" or "William Murray" + "Motion Picture Association" - perhaps needs some expansion to justify notability. {{unsigned2| at 08:20, 2006 February 10 |71.133.43.39}} |
*'''Keep''' - search "William Murray & Associates" or "William Murray" + "Motion Picture Association" - perhaps needs some expansion to justify notability. {{unsigned2| at 08:20, 2006 February 10 |71.133.43.39}} |
||
*Delete. With respect, google is a poor way to determine the suitability of a subject for encyclopedic treatment. For example, a porn star of absolutely no social, historical, artistic, scientific, political, or economic significance can easily get more google hits than, say, a 17th century thinker who was historically important in his time, and about whom there is an embarrassment of sources and references with which to write an article. In the case under discussion, I don't see how this individual deserves an encyclopedia article. He worked in the MPA for many years and now has his own consulting company—that's essentially what the blurb says. The entire thing reads like an advertisement you might find on a website—which, as a matter of fact, is exactly what it is. It's from [http://www.wmurrayassociates.com/bios.htm ''his'' website], and as that is not licensed under GFDL, it's a '''copyright infringement'''. All of which is almost sweetly ironical: there is a good chance this page was written by him or someone who works for him—ie. we're dealing, ladies and gentlemen, with a vanity piece on an anti-piracy motion picture suit who's being advertized for free on WP via a copyright infringement—possibly of his own doing. WP is not a venue for free ads, and until something of encyclopedic merit can be written about this chap, this page needs to go. [[User:Encephalon|<span style="font-family:Times;color:navy;cursor:crosshair;">ENCEPHALON</span>]]'' 08:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)'' |
*Delete. With respect, google is a poor way to determine the suitability of a subject for encyclopedic treatment. For example, a porn star of absolutely no social, historical, artistic, scientific, political, or economic significance can easily get more google hits than, say, a 17th century thinker who was historically important in his time, and about whom there is an embarrassment of sources and references with which to write an article. In the case under discussion, I don't see how this individual deserves an encyclopedia article. He worked in the MPA for many years and now has his own consulting company—that's essentially what the blurb says. The entire thing reads like an advertisement you might find on a website—which, as a matter of fact, is exactly what it is. It's from [http://www.wmurrayassociates.com/bios.htm ''his'' website], and as that is not licensed under GFDL, it's a '''copyright infringement'''. All of which is almost sweetly ironical: there is a good chance this page was written by him or someone who works for him—ie. we're dealing, ladies and gentlemen, with a vanity piece on an anti-piracy motion picture suit who's being advertized for free on WP via a copyright infringement—possibly of his own doing. WP is not a venue for free ads, and until something of encyclopedic merit can be written about this chap, this page needs to go. [[User:Encephalon|<span style="font-family:Times;color:navy;cursor:crosshair;">ENCEPHALON</span>]]'' 08:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)'' |
||
*'''Delete''' nn-bio. --[[User:Terenceong1992|Ter]][[Wikipedia:Esperanza|<font color="green">e]]</font>[[User:Terenceong1992|nc]][[User talk:Terenceong1992|e Ong]] ([[Chinese New Year greetings|恭喜发财]]) 15:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC) |
Revision as of 15:01, 10 February 2006
Non-notable bio Cnwb 01:14, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. Ruby 01:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete NN sounds. Reads off like a resume --† Ðy§ep§ion † Speak your mind 02:40, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - A google search for ""William M. Murray" + University of Southern California" turns up 113 results, but I don't think that's quite notable enough. Perhaps not a speedy, but certainly a delete. --lightdarkness (talk) 04:17, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep - search "William Murray & Associates" or "William Murray" + "Motion Picture Association" - perhaps needs some expansion to justify notability. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.133.43.39 (talk • contribs) at 08:20, 2006 February 10 (UTC)
- Delete. With respect, google is a poor way to determine the suitability of a subject for encyclopedic treatment. For example, a porn star of absolutely no social, historical, artistic, scientific, political, or economic significance can easily get more google hits than, say, a 17th century thinker who was historically important in his time, and about whom there is an embarrassment of sources and references with which to write an article. In the case under discussion, I don't see how this individual deserves an encyclopedia article. He worked in the MPA for many years and now has his own consulting company—that's essentially what the blurb says. The entire thing reads like an advertisement you might find on a website—which, as a matter of fact, is exactly what it is. It's from his website, and as that is not licensed under GFDL, it's a copyright infringement. All of which is almost sweetly ironical: there is a good chance this page was written by him or someone who works for him—ie. we're dealing, ladies and gentlemen, with a vanity piece on an anti-piracy motion picture suit who's being advertized for free on WP via a copyright infringement—possibly of his own doing. WP is not a venue for free ads, and until something of encyclopedic merit can be written about this chap, this page needs to go. ENCEPHALON 08:39, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
- Delete nn-bio. --Terence Ong (恭喜发财) 15:01, 10 February 2006 (UTC)