Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Klay Buckingham

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 (WP:G11) by user:Jimfbleak (non-admin closure). Whpq (talk) 19:02, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Klay Buckingham

Klay Buckingham (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I cannot find significant discussion of this individual in reliable sources per WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Google search brings up only social media and directories. Contested prod. ... discospinster _talk 01:20, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• I do not see the problem with this. Social Media is a very important thing in the 21st century. It's how he makes a lot of his money. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buckster69 (talk • contribs) 06:01, 15 April 2013‎ (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and filmmakers-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:21, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

• Delete. The thing is, there are multiple, multiple issues with this article. First off is that the article is written to promote Buckingham and is full of unsourced information. Even if you are Buckingham himself (which I'm inclined to believe), we need coverage in sources that are independent of yourself. By this I mean sources in things such as news reports and the like. (WP:RS) Social media sites are not usable as reliable sources, especially those that are edited by a primary source. At the most they can be used as a WP:PRIMARY or WP:TRIVIAL source, but that's pushing it and they will never show notability. You do seem to exist, but existing is not notability. (WP:ITEXISTS) As it stands, this could probably be speedied as promotion/spam. I'm sorry if this sounds harsh, but it really does come across as you coming on here to promote yourself, which is never well received. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 05:57, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

• Also, if you are Buckingham it is better to state as much up front. It's not against the rules to edit your own information (as long as it passes notability guidelines) but it is heavily, heavily frowned upon when people do not divulge that they have a conflict of interest. The reason I suspect you are Buckingham is because not only are the names very similar, but given that Buckingham appears to be a relative unknown in the acting world (very little chatter about him that wasn't started by himself), it's unlikely that you're someone separate that just happened to use a similar name. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 06:01, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

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.