Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael Deluca Tuddenham

:{{la|Michael Deluca Tuddenham}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Michael_Deluca_Tuddenham Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Michael Deluca Tuddenham}})

I feel that this article is self-promotional, and also does not meet the standards for notability. {{Shortcut|WP:A7}} {{Shortcut|WP:SOAP}} {{Shortcut|WP:INDISCRIMINATE}} Rabbitflyer (talk) 20:00, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

• Speedy Delete yes this page is super-promotional, which is the exact reason why it should have been speedy deleted. Cannot see why a new user has decided to put this up for AfD. Joseph2302 (talk) 20:06, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
• Sorry if I am being troublesome, but the policy page said that both speedy and prod should be used when no objections to the deletion are raised, and objections were raised by one user other than the creator of the article. I am a bit of a newb, so please correct me if my interpretation of this policy is incorrect. Thanks, Rabbitflyer (talk) 20:10, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2015 May 25. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:13, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
• Speedy delete per G11. Nothing even vaguely close to notability; the inadequate best is his music charting in Miami. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:05, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:44, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fashion-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:45, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• Delete Also note that there seems to be sock-puppetry afoot. User:Expensivenews created and edited the page, then User:ProfessionalEditorOfWikipedia appeared on May 25 to contest the speedy delete. LaMona (talk) 03:22, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

: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.