Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Dawson: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:18, 29 December 2009

This discussion was subject to a deletion review on 2009 October 6.
For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review.

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. Tikiwont (talk) 09:18, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shane Dawson

Not notable autobiography.

Stunt performer with history that can be seen here: [1] Carbonrodney (talk) 07:02, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete vain vanity in vain. JuJube (talk) 07:08, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - verily violates verification (and WP:RS ... sorry, I took it as far as I could) LonelyBeacon (talk) 07:12, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom ww2censor (talk) 22:59, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Bondegezou (talk) 14:05, 24 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete per above. Themfromspace (talk) 01:51, 25 July 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.

What? I think this is biased stupidity. He's more popular than most side actors that appear on wikipedia, and yet we can't have a page on him because he lacks importance? Instead we keep short stubs like Danny Pudi? Ridiculously biased.

Revision as of 00:21, 16 December 2009 edit Cunard (talk \| contribs) Extended confirmed users 40,646 edits m <noinclude>{{Delrevafd\|date=2009 October 6}}</noinclude> ← Previous edit		Revision as of 05:18, 29 December 2009 edit undo 72.220.125.86 (talk) →‎Shane Dawson Next edit →
Line 23:		Line 23:

	:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review\|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>		:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review\|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page. <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>


			What? I think this is biased stupidity. He's more popular than most side actors that appear on wikipedia, and yet we can't have a page on him because he lacks importance? Instead we keep short stubs like Danny Pudi? Ridiculously biased.