Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maximum Freud

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.

^{wat's sup} 00:40, 5 January 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

Maximum Freud

Neologism/Original research cooked up one Thomas Frey, part of building a walled garden of articles by Dr2tom (talk · contribs)} and Beeblebrox666 (talk · contribs) supporting Frey's ventures. These include (not nominations yet, just for informational purposes) The DaVinci Institute (and its redirect Davinci institute), Anthropometric Disaster Area, and, of course Thomas Frey. Only the very thinnest of references, all seemingly self-generated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Calton (talk • contribs)

Adding

neologism. Even "Anthropometric Disaster" gets a whopping 9 ghits, all of which are in essays by Thomas Frey Tubezone 16:39, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply

]

Agreed. --Calton | Talk 23:59, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per above, unreferenced essay similar to the deleted "List of obsolete technologies", and a vanishingly unnotable
neologism. Google search reveals that author is astroturfing this article on all sorts of unrelated fora and blogs, practically all relevant ghits for "Maximum Freud" are to spammed copies of this essay. Nuke the related articles as well. Tubezone 16:28, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep Merge discussions should take place on the talk pages of the respective articles, rather than AfD. Not sure quite what this editor is up to, has a pattern of edits and behavior on random topics which make no sense Rugbyball 18:53, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Rugbyball has been adding the same confusing message in several AfDs. Femto 19:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Strong scent of OR. WMMartin 17:46, 2 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. I smell either
WP:OR, or perhaps both. --Wizardman 00:30, 5 January 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.