Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mr. Disgusting

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 Redirect to Bloody Disgusting. GlassCobra 10:32, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mr. Disgusting

Mr. Disgusting (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Article was tagged for speedy deletion with the reason being "Article is about a real person, who is advertising his website, which constitutes blatant advertising." Hang-on request placed and probably is worth discussion. This is a procedural nomination by the admin considering Speedy/Hang-on requests. --VS talk 06:25, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

That reason is ridiculous. We'd have to go ahead and delete the articles for every internet celebrity or web journalist. I'll go ahead and add more biographical information, will that satisfy the burden? TheRegicider (talk) 06:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment Look more closely TheRegicider - this is a procedural nomination because you placed a hang-on tag on the page and I have just come along as the admin and decided to give it a chance to improve. You can as you wish edit the article as you say and hopefully convince others including the person tagging it for deletion that it is not just an article that seeks to advertise a web-site. To do that however you will probably have to read carefully some of the guidelines on how to write articles that have been provided to you on your talk page.--VS talk 07:01, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. Ok, awesome. Thanks TheRegicider (talk) 19:18, 19 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. Two of the article's sources (Gelf Magazine [though it claims to be 'looking over the overlooked', suggesting a lack of coverage of notable topics?] and Cinematical.com) look as though they could use articles of their own; they at least give the appearance of being established and perhaps notable. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 19:36, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --VS talk 10:48, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect with Bloody-Disgusting.com. The website is notable, but Miska isn't really discussed in sources, even if he occasionally contributes a quote to an article in, say, the NYT. TheRegicider, please see WP:WAX. Other articles may or may not meet our standards. We are judging this one in particular. (Also, I agree that Gelf and Cinematical may meet WP:N. I think Cinematical has had some linkspam issues and Gelf came up last year in something, but I can't find it.) --Dhartung | Talk 19:06, 28 February 2008 (UTC)
  • Merge per Mr. D.......ng (sorry, couldn't resist that, Dhartung) Mandsford (talk) 21:52, 28 February 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.