Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Scott Francis Crist

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 speedy delete per WP:CSD#G11, unambiguous advertising, by DGG (talk · contribs). —David Eppstein (talk) 23:08, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Richard Scott Francis Crist

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

Seems to fail WP:BLP. Looks like WP:PEACOCK. Subject is a wildlife biologist and entrepeneur. Various press cuttings linked, but none seem to suggest notability as opposed to publicity. Uncategorized. --Legis (talk - contribs) 06:25, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I've tried to do the most basic of cleanups so you could actually read the references, many of which were not reliable sources (thus deleted, some individuals website). After all is said and done, I see a couple of incidental mentions and one slow news day about how he converted his van into a shark. The article as it stands is more of a resume, and even if the individual WAS truly notable, it would require a fundamental rewrite. The fact that the article appears to be written by Richard Scott Francis Crist himself (User:Richsfc) who has made zero contributions outside of creating his autobiography here doesn't help to establish notability. Not a reason to delete by itself, but demonstrates the article is original research, biased, with a conflict of interest, and in the end doesn't establish notability. Dennis Brown (talk) 15:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article was created as an advertisement of the person; as such, I've marked it for speedy. IRWolfie- (talk) 17:07, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy has been applied. IRWolfie- (talk) 19:52, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:19, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:20, 13 December 2011 (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.