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. Yamamoto Ichiro 会話 01:09, 4 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Josh Rosenthal[edit]

Josh Rosenthal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Blatant advertising; the page is written by User:Joshrosenthal. Prod removed by anon without comment; likely Rosenthal when he wasn't logged in. I can't find a trace of press on this guy; while there is a musician and a record exec with this name who might deserve a page, I don't think this fellow does. Chubbles (talk) 18:11, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strongest possible delete, among other things, fails WP:BIO, WP:COI, WP:AUTO, possibly WP:HOAX (I can't imagine that none of the things in that rambling article aren't embelishments), and WP:V. I don't know that this is WP:SPAM but it is certainly WP:SOAP. Redfarmer (talk) 18:34, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete' To be fair - and if true - as an actor training at NIDA and work with Sydney TC is possibly notable but the rest needs huge amount of work! Vultureofbook (talk) 19:32, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - there is nothing in WP:BIO that says if someone trained at a prestigious location they are automatically notable. Rather, there are several clear ways to research someone's notability, primarily third party sources that can be cited in regards to said person. I think this article clearly fails the primary notability guidelines in that there appears to be no reliable independant sources for it. Anything could make someone "possibly notable" but the point of AfD discussions is to look for facts relating to that notability, not voting keep because they may be notable. This may have come off harsh, but I'm just trying to be direct and I obviously assumed your vote was in good faith. - Gwynand (talk) 19:54, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah just had a google search on him and have changed my vote! Vultureofbook (talk) 20:00, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per WP:BIO and WP:NOTE. From a google search, it appears there may be a UFC referee who may actually be notable enough to have an WP article... but not this Josh Rosenthal. Gwynand (talk) 19:47, 29 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete vain vanity in vain. JuJube (talk) 02:50, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Its obviously a puff article for someone who isnt very notable at all. Kingpomba (talk) 04:48, 30 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletions. – David Eppstein (talk) 20:00, 2 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per all above. freshacconcispeaktome 17:46, 3 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. Modernist (talk) 18:34, 3 February 2008 (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.