Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pjuggle
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. Nishkid64 19:43, 20 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Having been started by a user with only one edit and whose username is identical to the article title, there is a definite conflict of interest here. Dubious notability, and since I am not an expert on juggling I am bringing it here. —EdGl 00:18, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Kukini 00:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Self-promotional. Ganfon 00:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Only references are his own sites and a forum. Fan-1967 00:28, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. --Davidbober 01:01, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Drop the article (that's my attempt at a pun. It's bedtime.) The JPStalk to me 01:06, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete vain vanity in vain. Doo doo, doo-doo-doo doo doo, doo doo doo. JuJube 02:00, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- 'Delete per nom. —dima/s-ko/ 03:21, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: If this individual "appears regularly on the variety programs of Univision and Telemundo," it should not have been difficult to find independent verification to establish notability. If the entry is recreated later on with some third-party sourcing, I might vote differently. Zahakiel 04:45, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as a vanity article. JIP | Talk 06:16, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom ThrustVectoring 08:20, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: This article 1. is hard to read and very sloppy 2. doesn't give good information. I would definitely say delete this article. Chickyfuzz123 17:56, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per above. Bucketsofg 19:48, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - per nom. Fails WP:COI. Ronbo76 20:11, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom ~ Joe Jklin (T C) 20:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - This is like a user Page but its written as an encyclopedia article. Definitely delete or transfer info to the users User Page if it's describing his/her self. Tellyaddict 20:58, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete -cant help but agree with all.DUBJAY04 21:30, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - shameless self-promotion. Philippe Beaudette 22:34, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I see no reason why this article should be here. --Sir James Paul, La gloria è a dio 00:25, 16 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - ah, vanity pages. If I could find more of him online, I'd be tempted to slap on a 'weak keep' and a cleanup tag, but as it is he's not as notable as he makes himself out to be. Dåvid ƒuchs (talk • contribs) 00:41, 16 January 2007 (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.