Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Hagan
Since this AfD started, the author of the article (Ghfkghdkfhsk) has put a considerable amount of effort into trying to make the article look more notable. He/she has added large amounts of detail, but the substantial majority of it is not about Hagan, but rather about other people, entities, or events that Hagan has some sort of connections to. In fact it seems that the article has been converted into a |coatrack to promote and publicise the Federalist Party. There are currently apparently 33 references, though some of them are duplicates, so the true number is smaller than that. Two of these references are not online, but they are just high school and university records of his graduations, so they do nothing to establish notability. Another two are mirror copies of the Wikipedia article on other sites, and so are of no value at all as references.  Most of the other "references" are web pages which do not mention Hagan, and those that do are either articles ''by Hagan'', not ''about Hagan'' or else make no more than one sentence or rarely two sentence mention of him, usually merely quoting him as a spokesman for someone else. One of them says "Collins spokesman Bill Hagan declined to comment", ''and that is the only mention of him''. The whole lot looks to me like what I would expect if someone had (a) done a Google search for "Bill Hagan" and then indiscriminately added links to the resulting pages in an attempt to make the article look as though it is well-sourced when in fact it isn't, and (b) added links in the guise of "references" to pages relating to the Federalist Party as part of the campaign to publicise it. Frankly, if this is the best that the author of the article can find after evidently, as I have said above, putting a considerable amount of effort into trying to demonstrate notability, then I am even more certain than before that the subject is not notable. "The Bill Hagan article is now really great"??? Not to me it isn't. It's a spam coatrack article on a non-notable subject
— User:JamesBWatson, 10:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:COATRACK (Wikipedia:Coatrack articles)