Wikiquote:Votes for deletion/Randall Dale Chipkar


 * 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 author request. BD2412 T 16:06, 30 January 2012 (UTC)

Randall Dale Chipkar
Disputed PROD for lack of notability. The problem remains - this person (and the cited work) does not appear to be notable enough for a page. — UDScott 23:32, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Vote closes: 00:00, 2 February 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. ~ UDScott 23:32, 26 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. A Google search turned up a book review in a blog by a notable person, but there does not appear to be sufficient coverage in independent reliable sources to consider this self-published author notable. Note that the contributor is self-identified on his talk page as the subject of the article himself. ~ Ningauble 14:07, 27 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete There aren't any actual quotes in the article. From the blog link, I suspect that this is really spam advertising.--Collingwood 18:59, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * The contributor blanked quotes from the page after it was nominated. ~ Ningauble 19:18, 28 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete The contribution was not spam. I removed it after nomination because I support the contribution deletion vote based upon recognizing Wikiquote’s terms and not based upon the inaccurate statements of a skeptic blog author who never read my book. Ningauble has clarified with me that, “Wikiquote is neutral about whether the views expressed in the book or the blog are correct” and that Wikiquote’s coverage criteria are clear. Presently I agree with the contribution deletion vote, however, time will provide the sufficient coverage required. - User:Randall Dale Chipkar