Talk:Mike L. Murphy

Untitled

It's ridiculous that the article was kept as "no consensus" since the person is clearly not notable, but let's see if anyone can actually source this thing and assert notability. As it stands the article is unreferenced, has nothing to verify notability, and is far from neutral. If those who argued to keep this article can do those things, I'd love to see them clean this article up. If not, why would they possibly have argued to keep an article that cannot be sourced, or the notability of the subject verifiable? Doesn't make sense. Laval (talk) 14:14, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

As nominator of both AFD's, User:Laval's not agreeing with the previous close would have been a reason to take User:Skomorokh's October 2009 close[1] to DRV way back then. While returning it to AFD after sevaral months is fine, the impuning of the decision and integrity of the closer as a means to negatively color the AFD discussion is unneccessary. I am removing the neutrality tag, as

A) the article is now just as about as "neutral" as it can possible be,

B) the orginal author has not edited since April of 2009,[2]

C) the original author is not the major contributor/editor to the article,[3]

D) the author was never notified regarding any claimed COI,[4]

E) nor was their any discussion with him about it,[5]

F) and of a greater concern, the author was never notified of either AFD.[6]

Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 21:29, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Your condescending and patronising tone (and your accusations) aside, how has notability been proven in this case, other than a Variety article about a film that never got produced and a bunch of films that the subject was simply a previz animator (a grunt level worker, to say the least)? Laval (talk) 07:24, 19 July 2010 (UTC)

Image

User:Raider307 uploaded a picture of Murphy, which I've removed from the article for now since the uploader of that image (Raider307) claims it as his own work, and identifies himself as Murphy. Either this isn't true and Murphy is not Raider307, making the source of the image unclear, and if it is true, then Murphy should not be adding anything about himself to this article Laval (talk) 15:28, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mike L. Murphy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120229035651/http://www.allvoices.com/news/5457511/s/50610715--wimpy-kid-now-a-force-as-a-director to http://www.allvoices.com/news/5457511/s/50610715--wimpy-kid-now-a-force-as-a-director

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 11:21, 30 January 2018 (UTC)