Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James longstaffe

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. —Xezbeth 05:11, May 10, 2005 (UTC)

James longstaffe

Besides his unverified and presumably unreported "claim" to have accurately predicted 9/11, no claim to notability. Samaritan 18:57, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Smacks of Vanity Roodog2k 18:59, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete --Spinboy 19:40, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Vanity. --Quale 19:44, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Ground Zero 19:52, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. GrantNeufeld 20:15, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. His claim of having predicted 9/11 is the only worthwile part of the article. Rest is complete vanity, I have a varied CD collection too. Unfortunately, none of it is verifiable. Mgm|^(talk) 21:18, Apr 29, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vanity. Megan1967 01:54, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Hey, if I knew which bourgeosie apartments he lived in, maybe I could find out if he's notable when I'm at home next week! Adam Bishop 06:36, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. Sjakkalle 09:03, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Userfy to User:Revisionistking - not notable, vanity. --Deathphoenix 04:28, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Changed my vote to Userfy --Deathphoenix 04:33, 1 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Make that my vote. Samaritan 18:05, 1 May 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.