Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos nemer

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 deletion (closed early per WP:SNOW to avoid further disruption). -- Ed (Edgar181) 01:31, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Carlos nemer

Previous vote: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos Nemer

This is not only recreation of deleted content both here (see Carlos Nemer) and on Simple English Wikipedia, but no sources and notability given. TheAE talk/sign 06:02, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, non-notable. No reliable source coverage, fails WP:BIO. Baileypalblue (talk) 06:44, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:10, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The correctly-capitalized version of the article has been salted after being deleted seven times, the first under Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carlos Nemer, the rest A7's and G4's. Please note also that anonymous editors have repeatedly attempted to alter the AfD to make it appear other than the delete decision that it was. The current article is different from the AfD's version (so presumably not G4-worthy) but not in any sense better. Also, note that his university lists him only as a substitute professor (whatever this means?) so I doubt he passes WP:PROF. If this article is deleted again I suggest that it be salted under this capitalization as well. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:19, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt per David Eppstein. --Crusio (talk) 10:00, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt. Per David Eppstein. Pass neither WP:PROF nor WP:BIO. Practically no trace of publications or anything that would indicate notability by this “polymath”.--Eric Yurken (talk) 15:34, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am his ex student, I could not pass his discipline 4 times and I simply want to kill this guy ! briossferic; — 201.19.218.49 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Keep. I don´t believe straight-C students should be able to make a delete call. For me it´s a matter of logic, if a professor is so hated by some ex-students then there´s a great possibility of his performance becoming internationally recognized, and more than that Wikipedia cannot establish any barrier based on the origin of the person. (someone deleted the rest of this argument probably because of its sharp content). completor 5 February 2009 (UTC)
Keep, The article is not finished political barrier against emerging countries which is the case of Brazil. What if all his (Prof.Nemer´s) scientific production is written in Portuguese (which seems to be the case), why we should delete it? Because we simply don´t speak Portuguese ? And last but not least what if the scientific production of a person was written in a more obscure language? should we delete it because of that? chiropratic - Boston. 5 february 2009; — 201.19.218.49 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Comment Both above comments were posted within minutes of each other, from the same IP (which maps to somewhere in Brazil, not Boston:-). --Crusio (talk) 18:50, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Boston is the name of our server Mr. Know-it-all Crusio. (This can be considered another example of the political exclusion talked before. -Why cannot a server be called Boston ? If it were in the US there would be an extension like Boston-US or something...). Brazil is growing fast it´s a very young country and will certainly contribute a lot to the world. contactplanet. 5 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.212.234 (talk) — 201.19.212.234 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Delete, despite the passionate plea from "Boston," and even though I may be guilty of, *ahem*, political exclusion. Drmies (talk) 19:46, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, The article is not finished and it´s a well known person with more than 63000 Google hits. brakiarya, Brazil 5 February 2009 (UTC); —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.212.234 (talk) — 201.19.212.234 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Time for a sockpuppet investigation. Drmies (talk) 20:47, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt per David Eppstein. Ray (talk) 20:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, Dear Mr. David Epestein you have voted more than three times... What´s the meaning of that? Dear Mr. David is this some type of ethnic persecution or are you another C-student of Prof. Carlos ?? Delaytimes900. 5 February 2009 (UTC) — 201.19.212.234 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Comment AfD is not a vote. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:27, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

*facepalm* MuZemike 22:27, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and salt Fails WP:PROF by a country mile, and looks like probable recreated material, so likely speedy. Certainly WP:SNOW. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. It´s a rare opportunity to discuss the complexity of international relations. Since this is a Brazilian scientist "no sources and notability is given" of course you won´t find them because they are all written in Portuguese. But since there´s a universally accessed platform such as the internet the possibility of international visibility has increased exponentially. In other words if you keep this article others more will come and the final result will be a broader and closer-to-its-original-purposes result. Bottom line intellectual democracy will have a substantial growth. blairwitchhigh 6 February 2009 (UTC); THE PREVIOUS CONTRIBUTED BY 201.19.96.129.— 201.19.96.129 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- In other words, you admit to spamming, which is clearly against Wikipedia guidelines. MuZemike 08:25, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Salt as per everyone. Edward321 (talk) 02:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
delete, salt per David Eppstein Pete.Hurd (talk) 03:46, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and let the article expand per chiropratic tokamak10 6 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.112.115 (talk) — 201.19.112.115 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
Delete nn Twri (talk) 17:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Six votes and counting by the WP:SPA with IP address 201.19.218.49; one delete and five keeps, with plenty of nonsense arguments. This IP traces to “Tele Norte Leste Participações S.A.”, an ISP in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, where Prof. Nemer works.--Eric Yurken (talk) 18:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: if so many are calling for salt, it must be snowing. Drmies (talk) 20:39, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: How can anybody in the world behave in such a way speaking about deleting an article that was not even finished, an article presenting only a few lines? speaking about a person notable for its great background that was not even detailed. It looks to me as if whitchhunting has never ended in the northern hemisphere..., more, I would say it became more sophisticated, perhaps it went electronically, it became part of the internet now... (Who could ever imagine that? maybe it´s part of a irrational collective ritualistic inconscient behaviour (Young) and no matter which media you use it will never be extinguished). (Keep); antishadow 6 February 2009; —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.19.208.66 (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just my hubris, I suppose. 201.19.xxx.xx, you got so many socks, there ought to be a pair in there among them. Drmies (talk) 21:27, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete (A7) and salt — Like the 6 or 7 other times it was deleted, the same thing: nothing verifiable indicating why this person is remarkable in any way. I'm also citing the snowball clause], assuming the weights of the opinions of established users far exceed those of the canvassers/meatpuppets. MuZemike 01:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.