Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marco A. Diaz

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. Tim Vickers (talk) 22:40, 18 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Marco A. Diaz[edit]

After a discussion with wimt, I believe that a few minor appearances at iMDB does not satisfy notability guidelines. The article was also created and has been edited almost entirely by a user with a username very similar to the article title (Marcodiaz13 (talk · contribs) vs Marco A. Diaz) leading me to believe this is a possible COI/self promotion.

I originally Prodded the article, but the notice was removed with no explanation as to why in the edit summary or on the talk page. During this removal, my {{biography}} and {{coi}} tags were also removed (diff). ChaoticReality 05:34, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from article creator: I have created this page to try to illustrate the success and hard work of my cousin. I did not know that wikipedia discouraged the creation of pages for people at a early stage of success in their career. I have created the page with no ill intentions of hurting anyone, so If my edition and contribution is not welcome I will gladly delete and persist in my efforts. I apologize for trying to create the page, and did not know that only strangers may create a page for someone. Thank you for your advice and lesson.Marcodiaz13 (talk) 05:48, 11 June 2008 (UTC)Marcodiaz13[reply]

and for Blaxthos i would like to see you get some IMDb credits, see how tribal and simple it is.

Delete - Seems to fail WP:N, as there are no reliable references beyond tivial listings at imdb. COI aside (cough), come back when career has been more sufficiently covered. / Blaxthos ( t / c ) 05:39, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete although I commend Marcodiaz13 for his efforts the subject of the article doesn't meet the notability and verifiabilty standards set out in policy and guidelines. IMDB isn't a reliable 3rd party source because anyone can edit it (any many have done just that to try and mess with projects like this one). Jasynnash2 (talk) 16:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep -* 'Is IMDB a reliable source for its polling and statistics in a film article?

Two groups of editors have gone around in circles on this one. There was a consensus that it wasn't a reliable source in a previous discussion at WikiProject Films. But trying to remove references to it led to this backlash on Talk:Films considered the greatest ever, with another group arguing that IMDB should be considered a reliable source.

It is a reliable source for the statement "IMDB users voted xxx". We don't have to show that it's considered a reliable source in any other sense, as IMDB is notable enough to be included on its own merits. Chris Bainbridge (talk) 18:29, 15 December 2007 (UTC) Besides, IMDb has strict rules that only films gone to major screenings can go to the main page, you need a special account and it takes weeks to get your name there. It is reliable and can be proven to be honorable on its own. [1]

Delete Not notable at this stage of his career. NawlinWiki (talk) 19:31, 13 June 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.