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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 06:31, 18 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

DeVry DuPage[edit]

DeVry DuPage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

A Myspace page. Despite the article's grandiose claims to notability, there's nothing - especially no reliable sources - to indicate this is in fact more notable than any other Myspace site. On the contrary, the last paragraph, "About the Author", indicates it's original research. The author has removed ((unsourced)) and ((notability)) tags, so I'm forgoing PROD. Sandstein 05:29, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. This is unverifiable and unsourced (sources do not meet reliable source criteria). It is also not notable. --N Shar 05:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom - I wish I could have an article about my myspace too :(-from K37 05:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong Delete for violating WP:SPAM - page is an advertisement for an advertisement for DeVry), WP:POV for terrible wording, the majority of the external links are to other Myspace pages, and probably more if one looked further. Korranus 05:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy changed to strong, let's see if that watchful author can do anything to save it.Korranus 06:11, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Article violates WP:NOR as original research and WP:WEB since it is about a non-notable web page. The creation of this page may have been a misunderstanding. --Metropolitan90 06:18, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete unless properly sourced by end of this AfD cleaning up the problems with WP:COI Alf photoman 14:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above arguments. Jefferson Anderson 21:57, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete reads like an essay, and as original reasearch. Lacks reliable sources. Promotional. Resolute 00:28, 14 February 2007 (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.