Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Christopher
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. Xclamation point 03:30, 9 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Michael Christopher (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Unsourced, non-notable BLP. Filled with rumors and lacks encyclopedic depth. MBisanz talk 22:50, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-"Notability" is not a policy but a "guideline," I oppose deletion for "notability" which is a nebulous concept here. Time should be given for the material to be verified.--JRiverton (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- On what basis would you propose we keep articles? Delete them? ChildofMidnight (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Lack of sources is a problem but notability is clear if the statements in the article can be validated. Looie496 (talk) 00:10, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Appears to be notable in his line of work. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:28, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless reliable sources verifying the assertion of notability are found and included. X MarX the Spot (talk) 04:31, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak Keep lacks sources, looks okay though. Versus22 talk 10:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nomination. Subject might be known to some fans of gay porn but that doesn't make him notable enough to have an article in Wikipedia. 67.79.157.50 (talk) 15:00, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:01, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:PORNBIO. The person in question has not met the requirements. FingersOnRoids 20:30, 7 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - fails WP:PORNBIO on all 3 counts. Outsider80 (talk) 22:24, 8 March 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.