Talk:Michael Carabello
 | This page was proposed for deletion by an editor in the past with the comment: This article was deleted through the proposed deletion process. That deletion has been contested, and the article has been restored. Further attempts at deleting this article should be made through articles for deletion or the criteria for speedy deletion if the article meets any speedy deletion criteria except the recreation of deleted material criterion. |
| This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||
Propose Deletion edit
Notify author/project: == Proposed deletion of Mike Carabello ==
The article Mike Carabello has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
- This article reads like a summary page from a press kit used to promote artists/musicians. Or possibly a review from a newspaper. It certainly isn't suitably written for an encyclopedia. I think the guy is possibly notable enough, but this is very soapbox-like and promotional sounding. Additionally there is no real confirmable reference or citation other than the name of a newspaper. And even then, no specific article in the newspaper is referenced. But given how un-neutral and promotional this article is in, it needs to either be rewritten properly from the ground up by someone who is interested or deleted altogether.
While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Theshowmecanuck (talk) 04:52, 12 February 2012 (UTC)
- Following a request at WP:REFUND I have restored this as a contested PROD, reverted to the version before the rewrite which prompted the PROD, removed unsourced gossip and added basic references. This is now a very basic stub which could do with (properly sourced) expansion. JohnCD (talk) 11:49, 10 January 2014 (UTC)