Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Meghan Chavalier

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. - Mailer Diablo 12:26, 7 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Meghan Chavalier[edit]

Mostly self-promotional and unsourced autobiography written by Meghanchavalier (talk • contribs) in violation of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Verifiability. Notability of the porn actress has not been established using 3rd party sources per criteria set out in Wikipedia:Notability (pornographic actors). -- Netsnipe ► 04:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. This porn star doesn't seem to understand what Wikipedia is; the article originally had a disclaimer stating "Do not remove images from this profile," and she tried to get vandalism intervention for "her wiki page". Krimpet 04:45, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment user:Meghanchavalier posted this on Meghan Chavalier which I reverted: (RB9 7 2 04:51, 1 February 2007 (UTC))[reply]
THIS PAGE WAS CREATED BY MEGHAN CHAVALIER AND CONTINUES TO BE VANDALIZED BY THE FOLLOWING I.P. ADDRESS 24.166.81.57 WHICH HAS BEEN REPORTED MANY TIMES. IF THE PAGE CONTINUES TO BE VANDALIZED BY THIS USER MEGHAN WOULD PREFER THAT YOU DELETED THIS PAGE INSTEAD OF HAVING EMPLOYEES OF MEGHAN CHAVALIER PRODUCTIONS HAVING TO FIX IT TWO TO THREE TIMES A DAY.
Delete/Userfy - doesn't even have an IMDb entry: [1]. Part Deux 04:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (edit conflict) Apparently, she doesn't mind having it deleted. Why don't we just add {{db-author}} and save everyone some time? John Reaves (talk) 04:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- comment so labeled. Chris 05:03, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or verify with a fine tooth comb Josh Parris 05:00, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
speedy delete, the loud ALL CAPS comment above nails this as a vanity page. Chris 05:02, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, it was added by RB972, quoting "her". Part Deux 05:31, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - vanispamcruftisement. MER-C 08:24, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Huge conflict of interest; the subject also does not appear to meet the criteria stated in either WP:NOTE or WP:PORNSTAR. --Charlene 09:32, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please note that, contrary to the all-capitals notice by Meghanchavalier (talk · contribs), the article was not created by xem, but was actually created by Gpscholar (talk · contribs). Uncle G 10:04, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - I noticed that, but it seems that user Meganchavalier has made edits to the article in question. --Charlene 13:59, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Per WP:AUTO. And, per violation of WP:BL. Real96 10:13, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless problems with WP:COI and multiple neutral sources can be fixed by end of this AfD Alf photoman 15:43, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, nonnotable, unsourced, self-promotional. NawlinWiki 18:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete she has her "employees" writing this? We're not the classified ads here --TommyOliver 22:06, 1 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Autobio, COI, and the subjecy has no clue what Wikipedia is about, evidently. Realkyhick 10:01, 2 February 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.