Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric J. Lindblom PhD (2nd nomination)

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 of the debate was delete - Liberatore(T) 16:01, 31 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eric J. Lindblom PhD (2nd nomination)[edit]

Originally prodded as Vanity page - complete with testimonials. Prod tag has been removed but it's actually recreation of previously deleted content. I'd tag it as speedy but now it's on AfD what's the correct procedure? (thought it seemed vaguely familiar!)

Speedy as per my nom. Dlyons493 Talk 15:20, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Apparently the relevant field's equivalent of Angelyne, thousands of Google hits. The way to treat such low-rent but plainly visible Barnum wannabes isn't to ignore them, but provide objective articles setting out objective/NPOV information. See Robert Stanek for a good example of how this can be done. Monicasdude 15:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Most of googles for for a different Eric (N.) Linblom who is an antitobacco activist. I say no speedy though as the previous AFD was not completed. WP:SNOW is wrong sometimes. kotepho 17:01, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Actually, Eric J. gets more than 10,000 hits by himself. [1] If he weren't so ubiquitous, it would be hard to find any other claim for notability. Monicasdude 17:21, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Most of those links are to posts on weblogs and the like. I didn't see any official homepage at any official site. The fact that his research page is on a freely-hosted site is a bit striking. --Deville (Talk) 18:11, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

[2] gets 567 and almost all of them are from forum posts, comments.. and a review of "Zorro: A novel" on amazon. kotepho 18:13, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

If you remove duplicates you get down to 80 hits. The original 10000 without dupes is about 260. Weregerbil 18:18, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

delete I don't see how this meets WP:PROFTEST, which seems the appropriate test for notability of this NN bio topic. This vanity article's only vague claim to notability is a rather lame tendency to self-promotion. Pete.Hurd 21:57, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, vanity, fails Prof. test. Google search for "Eric J. Lindblom" -Bravenet is pretty telling leaving little but other blogs, forums and mirrors. [3] Googlewhacking is only effective if done with relevant search criteria. Deizio 01:45, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I've restored the article after deleting it when I saw the first nom and thought it was the current one. To the creator of this AfD, please be sure you always format 2nd AfD votes properly to avoid such confusion. Thanks. Harr o5 03:10, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

And before I vote, can we get a source on his Harvard think tank project? If he really is heading up something important - and at Harvard no less - then he may well be notable. Harr o5 03:11, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This profile has a list of what he is involved in (just hit end). This project is the one he is the lead of. kotepho 03:19, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Can we get a sense of how notable the think tank is? I see this as the only claim of notability that stands him above WP:PROFTEST. Harr o5 06:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom nn and vanity.--Jersey Devil 03:50, 27 March 2006 (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.