Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel C. Robbins
- 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was Speedy Deleted, vanity. After an hour or two of Wikibooks spring-cleaning I'm in a no-bullshit mood, and a 1:1-scale photo staring me in the face is clear proof of vanity. I doubt we have that hi-res a photo of Jimbo or the Queen, and they're demoted to thumbnail status. EDIT: oh, I almost forgot my trademark afd-closure line...: disagree with my boldness? Bite me. GarrettTalk 11:47, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Vanity, contributed by Danrobbins. Probably a speedy, but has had eyeballs before, judging from the history at Daniel Robbins, so might as well get a second opinion here. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Vanadu. —Cryptic (talk) 08:31, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Merely working for a major company does not make one notable. Putting a very large picture of oneself on a Wikipedia article does suggest a certain amount of vanity is involved. Average Earthman 09:21, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete but be easy on him. You can't expect the cathedral guys to know how to behave in the bazaar. :) Qaz (talk) 09:56, 11 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, possibly a speedy delete as there's no credible assertion of notability. -- Kjkolb 11:29, 11 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.