Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Foxx

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. Singularity 03:31, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chris Foxx

Chris Foxx (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

this vanity article doesn't have reliable sources backing up its dubious notability claims. brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:09, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Update The creator reinserted the WP:BLP violations that I deleted, giving the article another reason for deletion. --brewcrewer (yada, yada) 04:54, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete a google search, news etc. turn up no results (besides the article itself) about the person in question. Either a hoax, not notable individual or vanity page.  Atyndall93 | talk  04:21, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, no evidence of notability that can be sourced; likely a hoax. Possibly a WP:COI/autobiography, as images named N followed by a string of numbers, such as the one included in the article, are ostensibly copied from Facebook. --Kinu t/c 04:24, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete failed attempt at self-promotion. having "lobbied" for a role in a movie does not make you a movie star. Uucp (talk) 15:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  • I have adhered to all your petty complaints and have contributed links and references—Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiphopblogger (talk • contribs)
    • Myspace profiles, blogs, a site created by you, and other articles which indicate that they cull content from the Lauren London Wikipedia article are not reliable sources. --Kinu t/c 22:47, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Update You've ignored all my efforts to cleanup the entry and now i'm sensing that there seems to be a bias among the only three loser's who object to my entries. Performing a search turns up three pages of info from different sites none of them being this article other than the obvious first listing. Yada Yada that duh dun duh duns -- User:hiphopblogger
    • Resorting to calling other editors "loser's" [sic] pretty much invokes WP:SNOW here. I'm also willing to guess that this was you when you were logged out. The only bias here is against articles that don't conform to policies and guidelines. --Kinu t/c 00:47, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep I don't see why this article should be deleted. There are enough references, proving the article's notibility.--LAAFan 22:18, 28 May 2008 (UTC)
    • As indicated above, none of the references meet WP:RS. --Kinu t/c 02:30, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

thank you. someone else finally making sense! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiphopblogger (talk • contribs) 20:09, 29

  • Keep References don't meet YOUR guidelines. Many articles on wikipedia contain the same references. hiphopblogger (talk

May 2008 (UTC)

    • So nominate those articles for deletion. They really don't justify the existence of another article which doesn't meet Wikipedia's (not my) guidelines. --Kinu t/c 00:16, 31 May 2008 (UTC)


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.