Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Raymond Stolp

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. --Celestianpower ^háblame 15:12, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

Raymond Stolp

This biography contains claims of notability but they are unreferenced and given the hyperbole in the edit history are of doubtful veracity. The Uninvited Co., Inc. 20:29, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

• Delete without reliable sources, it reads like vanity and self-promotion. CDC (talk) 23:46, 17 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Vanity. Monkeyman 03:40, 18 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as above.Blnguyen | Have your say!!! 06:22, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Primary author, please see arguments in RS discussion page. RedManPlus 14:52, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, I don't see any reliable sources cited supporting his notability. Stifle 21:06, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
• "Keep" i own all of RS's catalog. i can't believe anyone would even be bothered by this. jealousy and insecurity are such nasty traits of emotional weaklings. get a life, haters.
• Keep Even though Mr. Stolp does not appear in Rolling Stone, he is a highly valued, respected artist of our generation. Interest in his musical pursuits as well as artisitc faculties is growing at breakneck speeds. It would be a great disservice to present and future generations to stifle his quest of informing people of his talents and making them aware of his place in this world of everything online. I myself own a highly sucessful website, which proudly displays a link to his work. I recieve numerous inquiries about his work daily. How can an artist wether it be musical, canvas, or the written word, be invalid? One must wonder if this form of communication and advertisement was around since the beginning of time, would someone had suggested a Beethoven entry here was vanity? Would Salvador Dali be put up for deletion due to someone judging his entry as self promotion? Furthermore, would a user decide that Einstein's theroy was impossible, thus put it up for deletion based on their own judgement that it was improbable? What has society dwindled to when people are so quick to jump on the judgement train. I say KEEP Mr. Stolp's entry loudly and proudly.

• Keep Over the last few years I have watched Mr.Stolp's career grow..With each passing cd his music has gained world wide recognition and critical acclaim. Not only do I own his cd's, but I own a web site where Mr. Stolp's, web address appears.. To delete him due to vanity or whatever other claims that are being brought against his entry at Wikipedia, is ridiculous. He is proud of what he does, he is honest, and he is talented. The trumped up charges agaisnt Mr. Stolp have no merit. Keep his entry in tact. His talent, integrity and dedication to his art, is proof of the kind of man he is.

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.