Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/W. Dan Hausel

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. Addhoc (talk) 14:48, 6 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

W. Dan Hausel[edit]

Apparent copyvio problems and probably WP:COI of some type up to and including possible entry of subject bio by subject or associate. See talk page for details. Ψν^Psi_nu 14:49, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Seems to be a fairly obvious WP:COI or copyvio and doesn't even really assert its own notability, nor does it appear to have any.--Oni Ookami Alfador^Talk|@ 15:11, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Alfador, looks like a resumé. Jonathan (talk • contribs • complain?) 16:02, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Noncompliant with WP:MOS but there are definitely claims to notability there too.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 19:54, 29 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I've just spent a few minutes researching the guy. The stuff I could find on the 'net was in the same vein. I don't see the notability. Being a successful and acclaimed geologist, martial artist, public speaker and sketch artist makes him interesting, but not encyclopedic. He exists, and there's stuff on the 'net to prove he exists - but none of the stuff I saw was an independent source asserting his notability. SilkTork *^SilkyTalk 18:42, 30 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Vanity article, no independent evidence of notability. andy (talk) 11:28, 31 December 2007 (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.