Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Moaya Scheiman

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 ~ trialsanderrors 00:36, 20 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Moaya Scheiman and Culinista[edit]

Blatant self-promotion by a chef. Culinista is a term he has invented to describe himself. -- RHaworth 20:07, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am his doing his PR, and felt that his Bio was missing here, the word is in use and is from a food history article on Salamanders that has been on the net for many years ( I now they are redoing his pages in anticipation of the new book-but I will see if I can find a current link), and the word is now in common use as it has been discussed in several forums as a word to be added to dictionaries. The citation is correct for the originator but if it offends to give credit I will remove the reference to coiner, but it seems silly.

I am also wondering why the Bio page has been flagged? I am trying to do a straight bio of a radio host,food writer, food historian who is well known in this part of the world. Before he was a chef he was a film director and published author. He is the Son of a famous American lawyer and would seem to be someone to be included..I thought...let me now before I go further here...thank you! JT — Preceding unsigned comment added by MisterTexperience (talk • contribs)

Comment. I am his doing his PR - translated into Eglish = yes, I admit that it is spam! -- RHaworth 21:18, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, neologism/advertising. Demiurge 21:22, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It's nice when spammers make it easy. Danny Lilithborne 21:47, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - we don't want PR, we want encyclopedia articles. - Richardcavell 21:52, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. May be recreated is notability established based on reputable independent sources. Mukadderat 16:54, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I can understand what you are saying, and would like to say that I was not aware that adding a bio of a person of interest was spam. I had been given the task of doing several bios only one of which was a chef. But this was my first article and I am now worried about contributing anything for fear of it being marked as spam-despite the belief that we are contributing encyclopedic copy. Since I have been asked to do this, will all my work be considered spam? and any Biographical material on Mr Scheiman also be? When this was flagged I had not got to his filmography and other particulars. is there a place in here for newposters to learn how to post, What am I missing? "I am doing his PR" should not preclude or eliminate useful encyclopedic information, should it? Is there a way that this information can be edited to adhere to guidlines?

I really think that being someone's PR representative is incompatible with writing neutral-voice, encyclopedic material about him. I don't think that you can contribute on articles that you have a financial interest in. - Richardcavell 23:28, 14 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please allow me to politely disagree. People do decent work for money all the time. This is how the world runs. As long as a person follows the wikipedia rules of notability/verifiability/"neutral point of view", following policies WP:CITE WP:RS, WP:NOR, etc. his contribs are OK. The major idea is that fo ar thing to be notable and information verifiable, it must be discussed in a reputable and independent source. Mukadderat 16:52, 16 November 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.