Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Santedorazio
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the discussion was delete. BencherliteTalk 16:44, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
User:Santedorazio[edit]
Spammy fake article, untouched by user since January 2010. User already informed of relevant guidelines without response. Hairhorn (talk) 20:02, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
- Delete/blank per nom and per WP:NOTWEBHOST. Robofish (talk) 16:15, 16 November 2011 (UTC)
- Delete, opposing blanking of this unsourced BLP. Delete per WP:UP#COPIES and WP:NOTWEBHOST. I note that this biography exists at Sante D'Orazio, though Sante D'Orazio and User:Santedorazio list different birth dates (January 23, 1949 for the former and January 23, 1956 for the latter). At creation, the article contained the 1956 birth year, but it was changed here. Which one is correct?
I note that the subject likely passes Wikipedia:Notability per the coverage he received in this Google News Archive search. Cunard (talk) 09:18, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
- Support blanking as there are NO serious WP:BLP concerns. Unsourced content should be removed if contested or controversial, and even then there is no need to wp:delete. However, support "delete", now that we are here. The page is clearly written as promotion. On the other hand, if the subject is notable, keeping the content available behind a blanking may help soemone write a ddecent article, and this last point should trump. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 15:55, 23 November 2011 (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 page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.