Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Matthew Delooze

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. --Coredesat 04:20, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Matthew Delooze

Matthew Delooze (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Only claim of notability is that he has written 3 books. One of the books is published by a minor niche publisher, "Experiencer eBooks". The other two are self published. I can't find independent reviews of the books. Books do not appear to meet WP:BK, so I don't see how the author does. Mark Chovain 23:56, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

• I personally think this should be a speedy delete. Someone else put the speedy tag on the article, but the tag was removed. Mark Chovain 23:58, 5 September 2007 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 00:23, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep it's just the Illuminati serpents compelling you to delete this article. Matthew Delooze knows the truth.Merkinsmum 00:34, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

  Is there any chance you could expand on your reasoning? Remember, this is not "votes for deletion". Mark Chovain 00:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Hi my comment was a bit flippant, I personally think it would be a shame to remove his article as I read one of his books and found it intensely amusing, I know there's no reason he is noteable though apart from if the novelty of hilarious levels of psychosis was considered noteworthy.Merkinsmum 17:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment I'd be careful messing with the "reptilian humanoid" guys. Delete with caution. MarkBul 00:45, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

  Note: This is not David Icke, who is most definitely notable. Mark Chovain 00:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

• Speedy delete. I still don't see an assertion of notability in the article. (For what it's worth, I added the speedy tag, and TigerShark removed it.) — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 01:40, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete: The lizardmen have removed all the notability of the article from Wikipedia confirming the world wide conspiracy. Shot info 01:47, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete. I for one welcome our new reptilian overlords. There is no evidence given of wider notability to warrant an article. Capitalistroadster 02:22, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete in lacking coverage for him or his books Corpx 04:56, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
• comment oooh he has a new book out, from a slightly more promising sounding press- 'david Icke books', perhaps affiliated to Icke, [1] does that make him a bit more noteable?Merkinsmum 18:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

  It doesn't really affect the notability, as for a book to be considered notable, it should receive multiple independent reviews (with some caveats - see WP:BK). I assume the bar for an author should be around the same place: In general, they are only notable if they have published a notable work (or more? not sure). Furthermore, David Icke books appears to be an online store rather than a publisher. According to Matthew's own storefront, it is self published.[2] Mark Chovain 23:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep Translation in progress from frenchwiki --Morfal 17:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

  This is the prinicpal author of the article, who has made few (if any) edits outside of the article and comments. It should also be noted that the article on the French wiki is also up for deletion. — Arthur Rubin | (talk) 17:20, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

  But I work a lot on the french wiki! --Morfal 17:29, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

  Sorry it doesn't matter how much work you do if your article's subject isn't notable:(:(Merkinsmum 00:25, 8 September 2007 (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.