Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Freeze

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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 22:19, 28 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Christopher Freeze[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:BIO terribly. This is an attempt by Mr. Freeze to write his autobiography on Wikipedia. See this page on his website as clear evidence (and it certainly fails the WP:DUCK test). He originally had it sourced almost entirely to self-published sources or sources that do not confirm the claims, and removed tags when I placed them in the article. He also twice (once as an IP) tried to put his "Freeze's law" on List of eponymous laws. After it was removed, he created Freeze's law, which was quickly speedy deleted. He twice removed the speedy nom from that page. Sundayclose (talk) 23:21, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

delete Whilst the untagging and creating Freeze's law do not persuade me, the lack of indepth source availability does. Also, I would click on ref's only to see that while they sourced part of a sentence, the source did not provide in depth coverage of the subject. Much of the sourcing is self-referential-- to subject's books. The pilot qualifications, while superficially impressiuve, do not actually serve to meet WP:GNG or WP:anybio. The credentials as an author do not meet notability requirements for an author.00:03, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

Additionally, I feel like it's a variety of WP:Webhost Dlohcierekim (talk) 00:26, 22 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete because a lack of notability and Dlohcierekim's research above. --Lockley (talk) 22:12, 28 May 2017 (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.