Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Puckorius

:{{la|Paul Puckorius}} ([{{fullurl:Paul Puckorius|wpReason={{urlencode:AfD discussion: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Puckorius}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

The article was identified by our COI bot as a possible COI violation because it was created by an SPA with the same name as the water filter Mr. Puckorius is trying to market. I would say that there must be better ways to market a water filter than to write a Wikipedia article about a guy who gets a grand total of 63 Ghits. The article states that "Puckorius has worked for over 50 years..." and yet he is only 57 years old. I guess he started designing that water filter when he was 7. He is a non-notable engineer, on the level of tens of thousands of other engineers who have done some industrial work. Within this context, he is not prominent. Qworty (talk) 13:38, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

• I don't think he is plugging his water filter so much as flattering himself. Is vanity better than spam? Whatever. Delete. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

If the issue at hand is the reference to the water filter - shouldn't that simply be removed?

I felt he was notable for his global work in water treatment, specifically in regards to Legionella. Should that area be further expanded to properly qualify for inclusion?

While I understand there are a lot of engineers I do think he has more then a few unique "Special Credentials?"

Coolnsave (talk) 00:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• You are, so far, a WP:Single-purpose account, meaning that you have edited solely on one topic: [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/Coolnsave] Because your user name is the same as that of a product that is described in the article, our WP:COI bot tagged the article as a potential conflict of interest, possibly a WP:AB. You should become aware of all of these policies if you intend to continue to edit here, as well as WP:N. I'm sorry to be spouting all of these rules to you, but they are some of the rules we live by around here. If you can find WP:RS that support the notability of the article, you should find them now and include them in the article. Let us know, in this space, of your additions. Perhaps then the subject will be considered notable by enough editors for inclusion here. You might also benefit from reading WP:ARTICLE. Best of luck, Qworty (talk) 02:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I've been reviewing all the documentation I've been pointed at and have already made a few deletions from the the page including "Recent Work" and "External Links. I will collect references for the list of Special Credentials and get those posted ASAP. I am assuming the two remaining references are acceptable, if not please advise. Thank you.

Coolnsave (talk) 16:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

• Delete - no reliable sources about the subject, and also verifiability concerns given that the information has him born in 1950 and worked on the systems for over 50 years, that makes for quite the chemical engineering prodigy. -- Whpq (talk) 16:47, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
• Delete - this article fails WP:N, WP:V, and probably a few more Wikipedia policies. I don't think any amount of rewriting can save it. Red Phoenix (Talk) 15:44, 29 March 2008 (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.