Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brendan Paddick
While |conflict of interest isn't a deletion rationale in and of itself, in this instance its effect has been to make a royal hash of the article. The tone is a blatant POV mess (let's just say that the talk page admission that the article has been edited by the subject's own company's own marketing department surprised me about as much as the sun rising in the east), nearly all of the referencing is |primary sourced crap, and the article will need such a ''massive'' quality overhaul to be brought back into line with Wikipedia's actual content standards that starting over from scratch would be infinitely preferable to attempting to fix ''this'' version. No prejudice against recreation of a ''good'' version in the future if better sourcing can be found and a more properly neutral and encyclopedic writing tone can be maintained — but this version desperately needs to be given the |nuke and pave treatment
— User:Bearcat, 08:33, 16 November 2014 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:COI||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES||WP:NUKEANDPAVE (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest)