Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prem Raj Pushpakaran

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was delete. Materialscientist (talk) 02:42, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Prem Raj Pushpakaran

The AFC article has been around for several years. It has been updated nearly every day for the last several months by single purpose IPs and accounts. I do not believe it is being prepared as an article, but is rather being maintained as a autobiography for self-promotional purposes. In essence, the AFC process is being abused to host an personal webpage or resume on Wikipedia since the subject does not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for inclusion (the AFC has been declined in the past for this reason). Per WP:NOTWEBHOST, this page should be deleted. Peacock (talk) 11:25, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the subject of this autobiography has been sanctioned in the past for repeated attempts to introduce his biography into Wikipedia. See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Drpremrajpushpakaran/Archive and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Prem Raj Pushpakaran for details. Peacock (talk) 11:31, 29 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete None of this amounts to notability under either the GNG or WP:PROF, and is not conceivably likely to survive an AfD. DGG ( talk ) 04:18, 30 May 2014 (UTC) .[reply]
Delete per WP:NOTHERE.--Laun chba ller 09:27, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per DGG. Salih (talk) 11:07, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The page has been copied to User:Vijay dasan/sandbox, so it should be deleted too. Peacock (talk) 11:10, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. On the merits of the page, it has drifted into webhost territory. On the related conduct, a number of IP editors have been vandalizing the discussion here and harassing other editors. Keeping this page is thus no longer in the best interest of the project, so I endorse deleting this page and speedy-deleting any further attempt to create a page for him in AfC or Draft space under CSD G4. —C.Fred (talk) 13:06, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This needs to be removed. There is crap on my talk page about it as well.--Stormbay (talk) 16:49, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can honestly say I've never seen a XfD protected mid-discussion. I came here from the same crap posted at User talk:Ron Ritzman. Will the next admin who edits this page please block 101.63.180.200?--Laun chba ller 17:01, 31 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, done. Black ~~Kite~~ kite (talk) 19:05, 31 May 2014 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.