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. MBisanz ^talk 13:09, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Randolph Buss[edit]

Randolph Buss (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Spammy piece about a non-notable financial advisor. Only 88 ghits none of which are particularly exciting, no evidence of notability in the article and totally irrelevant references - nothing to support a claim of notability. Fails WP:SPAM, WP:BIO, WP:N, WP:VER andy (talk) 13:19, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per nom as WP:RESUME with entirely unsourced claims. Only citation is a 10-minute interview with Nouriel Roubini, which doesn't mention Buss. No evidence of notability; no sources for the Buss info. / edg ☺ ☭ 15:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• commentI declined a previous prod on the article for being promotional--so it was, but I removed the promotional part. The author very unwisely has replaced most of it, using the article as a springboard for his stock market predictions.I have no real opinion about the notability. But the surest way to get unfavorable attention to an article is to insist on adding spam. DGG (talk) 19:05, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Written by SPA and reeks of self promotion. Drop kick this article right off Wikipedia (see author name). — RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 19:52, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please be civil. 160.39.213.152 (talk) 01:21, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Don't confuse humour with incivility. Wrongly accusing a fellow editor of incivility is itself not civil (oh dear, have I just done that myself?). Anyway, I thought it was quite amusing :) andy (talk) 10:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • You're right, I think I read too quickly the first time and misread it as "drop kick this author off Wikipedia." Sorry RH. 160.39.213.152 (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as a self-promotion by an user of a single-purpose account who assumed ownership of the article. Alexius08 (talk) 02:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Deletion isn't punitive. The page should be deleted because there are apparently no sources about Mr. Buss. Wp:auto, wp:own and wp:spa are irrelevant here. 160.39.213.152 (talk) 03:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not totally irrelevant - they add force to the case for deletion because autobiography is strongly discouraged. And lack of sources isn't necessarily a death blow to an article - it can always be fixed. You have to look at things in the round. Alexius08's comments are valid but not as strong as they could be. andy (talk) 10:02, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • If no sources about him can be found, the article is necessarily unfixable (and conversely). 160.39.213.152 (talk) 13:17, 31 January 2009 (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.