Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ian Gurvitz

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 speedy delete. G12, copyright violation. Mgm|^(talk) 09:10, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ian Gurvitz[edit]

not notable. Goggle search finds far more hits for a diiferent Ian Gurvitz. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 07:52, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The article text is basically a copy of the text contained in reference 1 (a Huffington Post biographical paragraph). Nothing inherently notable about this individual, based on content of article or link. TheFeds 08:23, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I wasn't sure if the article met CSD G12 or not. If it does, consider this a request for speedy delete. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 08:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom or speedy delete under CSD G12. - 149.142.220.74 (talk) 18:49, 11 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I'd also support speedy (CSD G12) if it's appropriate. - 71.138.125.138 (talk) 05:50, 12 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^Happy ^Holidays 00:56, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment- why was this relisted? Consensus is clear. Reyk _YO! 01:35, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Consensus was all set for deletion and then this had to get relisted. I don't understand this... Tavix (talk) 01:53, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Maybe relisted because of the IP !votes? Anyway, the article should be deleted; the subject does seem to be not notable enough and it is mostly a copyright violation. Chamal ^talk 02:05, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 02:19, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I doubt that. Anon votes count if they are based on policy, from what I've seen. The anon votes here look like they're based on policy. -- Gmatsuda (talk) 02:46, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 04:46, 16 December 2008 (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.