Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Westra

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 05:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Westra

There are no non-trivial WP:ATT sources, fails notability requirements, totally fails verifiability. Tmtoulouse 08:34, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete no assertion of notability; promotional Tom Harrison ^Talk 14:16, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Article has only been edited by one person, who has done virtually no other edits. This editor has, so far, seemed to spend far more effort arguing Wikipedia policy than searching out references. The content is just marketing spam. Bhimaji 15:43, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, I really don't know what to do. I tried to create an article as a new user and have been shut down, so I tried to argue my position and have been shut down for arguing. This is my first time trying to really add something to wikipedia and some people don't even want to give me a chance. I'm just afraid this article will be deleted before there is any opportunity for others and myself to improve it.Jellybean333 16:13, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Give it a Chance

I'm not asking for a lot, but if anyone reads this, please help me keep this article alive. If you can add to the article and also vote for it to stay for alive that would be great. I am a new user to wikipedia and have just created this article in the last few days. I want an opportunity to improve the article and allow others to as well, but for some reason some people just want the page deleted- who knows! I've promised to edit and research, and I know with some time others will add to the page as well, but the article is not getting the opportunity! Thanks for any help (especially sources and research).Jellybean333 16:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Userify/Delete Let Jelly work on it in their space. -- Ben 16:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Help Him/Her - I'm willing to help out on this project. I don't know a lot about the author, but I'm interested in the authors subject of writing. If the article is not deleted, I will help out on it. I see some big problems with the article, but I want to draw attention to one thing from the AFD page:

"Before nominating a recently created article, please consider that many good articles started their Wikilife in pretty bad shape. Unless it is obviously a hopeless case, consider sharing your reservations with the article creator, mentioning your concerns on the article's discussion page, and/or adding a "cleanup" template, instead of bringing the article to AfD."

Let's all play nice!! 128.187.0.164 17:09, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, nonnotable and self-promotional, insufficient reliable sources. NawlinWiki 17:27, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: 566 G-hits. Jelly should determine whether the subject of the article meets WP:BIO. We don't mean to bite, but we're always suspicious of people who come in and immediately create glowing new articles on less-than-marginally important people or companies that often read as though they were written by their subject. Morgan Wick 18:50, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I do not see how this material can be turned into an article about a notable author, unless there prove to be substantial media references to his books. DGG 04:27, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Userify/Delete Keeping to WP:Bite, I created a copy in Jell's workspace and suggested he work on it there. I tried to source the article, but all my favorite sources (like the NY Times), came up with nothing. Google seems to refer to a bunch of self-help sites.--Work permit 04:52, 8 June 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.