Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Forrester
per IvoShandar's reference breakdown. It doesn't help matters when the references aren't linked to the text they are supposed to reference, but it looks like the accusations of vanispamcruft several editors have suggested are appropriate. Doesn't appear to meet , , or . Constant berating of editors supporting deletion is a perfect example of  at work, additionally it's a superb way of shifting consensus away from the subject and comes across merely as desperation. If indeed an article's subject was truly notable then a Wikipedia article about them would be inconsequential, when this level of desperation is shown I ask myself, why? For this level of personal involvement someone either has too high an opinion of themselves or it's an attempt to promote themselves for some reason, usually money
— User:WebHamster, 20:13, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:BIO||WP:N||WP:MUSIC||WP:COI (Wikipedia:Notability)