This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was COPYVIO, and no alternative article has been offered. -Splash 03:08, 20 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Mark_H._Pritchard[edit]

VfD refreshed: POV promotional page, originally at Belzebuub. Moved by main author while earlier VfD in progress. See previous discussion at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Belzebuub Tearlach 20:37, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to copyvio (see discussion below) Tearlach 19:18, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• delete as NN, or at the very very least, clean with a fire hose as right now it says that Mark has psychic powers. JDoorjam 21:09, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• keep Pritchard is a widely known individual and possibly a psychic. Who is anyone to say that someone can't have psychic powers? Is it just a "matter of fact" that nobody has such powers?
• Keep, since his book "reached the position of best-selling Astral Projection book on Amazon.com" making him notable within his field. Vfd is not cleanup or hosedown. Kappa 22:28, 13 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

However this article goes, would the closing sysop please include the votes already cast at Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Belzebuub? Zoe 22:37, August 13, 2005 (UTC) *Keep. JDoorjam is a one-man cleanup and hosedown. I've done as much as I can to correct NPOV issues on this page which, if they stick, should make this whole thing less controversial. With that said, to throw another log on the fire, has anyone checked out the copyright status on that headshot? I would but don't know how to do it with photos.... JDoorjam 02:58, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Scrap and rewrite because there are more problems than that: the whole article source looks like potential copyvio from the Belzebuub page at Gnosticweb. The headshot appears to come from the one on the front page of belzebuub.com. Tearlach 04:01, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Weary delete per Tearlach. (Good find.) JDoorjam 04:13, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment: even if it's rewritten, the promotional origin makes it important to subject even the more mundane claims to scrutiny. For instance, Amazon best-seller status is not necessarily what it sounds: see writersweekly on the subject. And then there are the study centers, which sound like they have dedicated premises, yes? But a closer look finds that these venues are public rental rooms like the Indooroopilly Senior Citizens Centre, Brisbane, the Grattan Gardens Community Centre, Melbourne, and The Cedar Room, Wollongong Town Hall and Community Centre.

BTW, which takes precedence: VfD or copyvio? Easiest solution would be to slap a copyvio tag on it; it looks pretty clear-cut. Tearlach 11:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO, copyvio definitely takes precedence, since if the VfD were to keep it would have to be deleted anyway as a copyvio. If you find where it was copied from, please list it on Copyright problems. Zoe 19:04, August 14, 2005 (UTC)

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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.