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. Courcelles (talk) 15:01, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: ((subst:spa|username)); suspected canvassed users: ((subst:canvassed|username)); accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: ((subst:csm|username)) or ((subst:csp|username)).

Arnie Bong Fernandez Arquiza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

Article about a non-notable person created by a single-purpose account, and the references are to books that don't exist (one of them even says "unpublished") Erpert (let's talk about it) 17:15, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• No reason for deletion, I believe. No basis for claims. Try visiting the library of the Philippines so that you may find out if the boks really exist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ilovebongarquiza (talk • contribs) 13:44, 31 May 2010— Ilovebongarquiza (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
• As of the moment, I don't find your nomination substantial. In the Philippines, Bong Arquiza is indeed famous. The reference books stated in his page can be found in the national library of our country. You may visit it for purposes of verification. And in line with his notability, you may google his name and you'll see the number of search results you will find. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.114.232 (talk) 18:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC) — 112.202.114.232 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
  • A lot of Google hits alone doesn't equal a person's notability; the hits have to be based on reliable sources. Erpert (let's talk about it) 19:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete possibly speedily. No notability. An unpublished book and a privately published one are not a basis for supporting notability. Nor are links to twittering, blogging and so on. He's been in several organisations. So? So have many of us. He witnessed the signing of a charter. How many others did the same? There are three ghits for '"University of the Philippines Charter" Arquiza'. This is one, another appears to show the subject didn't get elected as one of 12 USC Councilors, the third seems to be an appeal for support in the aforementioned election. Peridon (talk) 21:31, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment and warning This is not a vote by numbers, so if you are creating an account to repeat messages of support without addressing the problems found by the nominator and myself, then don't bother. Also, do not change other people's posts. I have just restored the nomination to its original wording. Leave it alone. Any repeat of this may lead to you being blocked from editing - even if you use an IP address rather than an account name. Peridon (talk) 21:40, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Taking everything at its face value, it still isn't notable. Privately published books and unpublished manuscripts do not show notability, and there is nothing claimed here that might make one think otherwise. No specific leadership role is claimed, and being present at a large public event is not a claim of notability. Personally, i wouldn't hesitate at a speedy A7 for lack of a plausible claim to notability. DGG ( talk ) 23:18, 31 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete doesn't seem to be a notable activist. Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 10:11, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. I see no evidence of notability. — •KvЯt GviЯnЭlБ• ^Speak! 02:40, 4 June 2010 (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.