Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Quinn Sullivan

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 and redirect to Empower Texans. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Michael Quinn Sullivan[edit]

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

Created through a paid publishing stint — it reads almost entirely like a paid piece with a list of CV-material to boot Carl Fredrik^talk 23:08, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Texas-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:24, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Journalism-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:25, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:28, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

*Keep I am seeing enough independent coverage in reliable sources that seem to demonstrate this person is notable. He may not be well liked (according the coverage), but he has garnered notice in the press. I can see how the nominator sees this as a paid piece, because it does seem somewhat like that. Also, I think the less flattering coverage needs to be reflected in this article. The article seems to be one sided. Unfortunately, the press coverage cannot be argued with, unless I am missing something. The coverage in sources does not seem promotional or promotinally worded. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 05:49, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It is a proven paid piece — the original editor who created it has been blocked for paid editing. Your support of keeping it is exactly the problem with paid editing. No one is going to add that less than flatting content — so it will just keep being a flattering push-piece. There is no alternative to deletion, please reconsider: Steve Quinn Carl Fredrik^talk 14:26, 21 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. The IP who created the article originated from Dallas, Texas Michael Quinn Sullivan was born in Dallas, Texas. Look who uploaded images. One of the images is for Texans for Fiscal Responsibility. It was founded by Michael Quinn Sullivan. Look at those edits and those edits. It is interesting. Then we have these edits and this edit from an editor who was indef-blocked in December 2016. QuackGuru (talk) 03:32, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I am changing my ivote from keep to delete based on the above discussion and the presented evidence, as well as the evidence presented at this User talk page discussion here, and here . Wikipedia is not a platform for advertising, promotion, public relations, or a vanity page WP:NOTPROMO, WP:PROMO. --- Steve Quinn (talk) 02:46, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Empower Texans. This person does not need an article (plus all of the undisclosed paid editing which ruins its potential credibility), so the only use would be a redirect to Empower Texans. Elliot321 (talk) 15:55, 24 August 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.