| Revision as of 12:50, 26 May 2009 editMalcolmxl5 (talk | contribs)Administrators149,184 edits delete.← Previous edit | Revision as of 17:57, 26 May 2009 edit undoDreamGuy (talk | contribs)33,601 edits →Atsuhisa Hiruyami: response to false claims about sockpuppet investigationNext edit → | ||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
| :'''Comment''' Varbas was determined to be using multiple accounts during a sockpuppet investigation of a user banned for a string of socks used in AFDs to give faulty reasons to keep articles. Not sure why he isn't blocked. ] (]) 18:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC) | :'''Comment''' Varbas was determined to be using multiple accounts during a sockpuppet investigation of a user banned for a string of socks used in AFDs to give faulty reasons to keep articles. Not sure why he isn't blocked. ] (]) 18:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| ::'''Comment''': The investigation found that User:Varbas was not guilty of abusive sockpuppetry. Attacking me personally is not useful to this discussion. ] (]) 05:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | ::'''Comment''': The investigation found that User:Varbas was not guilty of abusive sockpuppetry. Attacking me personally is not useful to this discussion. ] (]) 05:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
| :::'''Comment''' Actually, the investigation found that you were using multiple accounts, and made a ruling that it was possible that the account was, in fact, being used by the banned editor but that not enough info was in yet. This is not the same as a finding of "not guilty". Misrepresenting sockpuppet investigation results with fake legalese to try to sound vindicated when you are not is highly deceptive. ] (]) 17:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''' A lack of significant coverage in ] means that that the subject fails to meet the ] nor is there any evidence that the subject meets the inclusion criteria for ]. --] (]) 12:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' A lack of significant coverage in ] means that that the subject fails to meet the ] nor is there any evidence that the subject meets the inclusion criteria for ]. --] (]) 12:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 17:57, 26 May 2009
Atsuhisa Hiruyami
- Atsuhisa Hiruyami (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Wow does this person fail notability criteria. Even the unreliable source that is the sole source other than this guy's personal web page points out that the only thing he is at all known for by the couple of people who may know him is an unreleased project: "This soundtrack is classified as Works, meaning it is not released officially." DreamGuy (talk) 14:02, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- What's your point? I don't understand a word you just said. Try speaking American, it's the only language I understand. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.146.29 (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
- If you don't understand written American English, how is my speaking it going to help...? DreamGuy (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. —Fg2 (talk) 10:36, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails notability criteria dismally. --DAJF (talk) 11:50, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- No indication that either his album or himself meet WP:MUSIC = delete. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:51, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
What is the point of Misplaced Pages if you can't contribute what you found? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.71.146.29 (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Delete entirely unsourced blp about a person for whom i can find no reliable sources that discuss him. The assertion of notability? That he privately released an album to some of his friends. Clear fail of BIO, MUSIC, CREATIVE.Bali ultimate (talk) 20:25, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
- Keep - Passes WP:CREATIVE. Subject is a notable Japanese composer. Varbas (talk) 23:16, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
- You assert this based on what evidence? Please share. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:56, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Varbas was determined to be using multiple accounts during a sockpuppet investigation of a user banned for a string of socks used in AFDs to give faulty reasons to keep articles. Not sure why he isn't blocked. DreamGuy (talk) 18:29, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: The investigation found that User:Varbas was not guilty of abusive sockpuppetry. Attacking me personally is not useful to this discussion. Varbas (talk) 05:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment Actually, the investigation found that you were using multiple accounts, and made a ruling that it was possible that the account was, in fact, being used by the banned editor but that not enough info was in yet. This is not the same as a finding of "not guilty". Misrepresenting sockpuppet investigation results with fake legalese to try to sound vindicated when you are not is highly deceptive. DreamGuy (talk) 17:56, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Comment: The investigation found that User:Varbas was not guilty of abusive sockpuppetry. Attacking me personally is not useful to this discussion. Varbas (talk) 05:08, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
- Delete A lack of significant coverage in reliable sources means that that the subject fails to meet the primary notability criterion nor is there any evidence that the subject meets the inclusion criteria for composers. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 12:50, 26 May 2009 (UTC)