Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Farrell Till: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 07:51, 22 January 2006

Farrell Till

Farrell Till simply isn't notable. He was an editor of a publication with a very small audience. He has written a few articles and debated a few people. These things certainly don't make him notable enough for an entry on Wikipedia. --Jason Gastrich 03:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete. Per nom. --Jason Gastrich 03:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- as nominator, your 'delete' vote is assumed.
Keep 28,800 hits on Google, and I'm not liking what I'm seeing here, looks like a revenge series of AfDs in retailiation for the Chuck Missler one. Ruby 04:00, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep This is and any other WP:POINT nominations. --Rob 04:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep; nomination made in bad faith. --keepsleeping quit your job! slack off! 04:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete There are obvious WP:POINT issues here but let's try to deal with each article on its own merits. In this case, there are just over 400 Ghits ( go to the end of the list and look at the count now). He seems at about the same level of notability as some of the diploma mill nomination. Dlyons493 Talk 04:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I think its important to point out, that in a speedy keep doesn't give somebody a free pass on WP:BIO. Its not a precedent for keeping the article, the way a normal keep would be. A speedy keep just puts things back the way they were yesterday. If we had done a speedy keep (which isn't happening apparently), nothing would stop you or any other editor from doing a good faith nomination. Its hard to tell somebody they shouldn't have done a nomination, but since they did, we'll give them what they want. --Rob 07:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. While I agree the nom was made in bad faith, I agree he is not notable. Crunch 04:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete per Dlyons493 and Crunch. It is a very immoral "revenge" for the AfDs filed against Jason Gastrich's articles, but this article is also not bery notable. Sycthos ^Talk 04:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- I hereby Abstain myself from these AfDs created in bad faith. Sycthos ^Talk 04:57, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Mr. Till's written works tend to annoy me, but I have encountered them more than once in my research. Notable, but a borderline case. → P.MacUidhir (t) (c) 05:35, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep nomination made in bad faith as an act of "retaliation." Mark K. Bilbo 05:52, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, nomination in bad faith; Till has shown some notable influence in the skeptic community, in large part because of his previous association with evangelical Christianity. And here's something that's amusing: One of the "few people" that Till has debated is Gastrich, after which, Gastrich posted a "gay urges" email forgery. There's obviously a personal history between the two, and I've suggested before that it would be a good idea for someone like Gastrich, who is completely incapable of acting from a neutral POV, to recuse himself from these kinds of things. - WarriorScribe 06:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I was skeptical, but he gets a good deal of hits at Google and five at Scholar Google.[1]--T. Anthony 07:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 *'''Speedy keep'''; nomination made in bad faith. --[[User:Keepsleeping|<font color="gray">keep</font>sleep<font color="gray">ing</font>]]  [[User talk:Keepsleeping|<font color="green"><small>''quit your job!''</small></font>]] [[Special:Contributions/Keepsleeping|<font color="green"><small>'''''slack off!'''''</small></font>]] 04:21, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 * '''Weak delete''' There are obvious WP:POINT issues here but let's try to deal with each article on its own merits.  In this case, there are just over 400 Ghits ( go to the end of the list and look at the count now).  He seems at about the same level of notability as some of the ''diploma mill'' nomination.   [[User:Dlyons493|<FONT COLOR="#00FF00">Dl</FONT><FONT COLOR="#44FF00">yo</FONT><FONT COLOR="#99DD11">ns</FONT><FONT COLOR="#DDDD11">493</FONT>]] [[User_talk:Dlyons493|<FONT COLOR="#DDDD11">Ta</FONT><FONT COLOR="#00FF00">lk</FONT>]] 04:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
+** I think its important to point out, that in a speedy keep doesn't give somebody a free pass on [[WP:BIO]].  Its not a precedent for keeping the article, the way a normal keep would be.  A speedy keep just puts things back the way they were yesterday.  If we had done a speedy keep (which isn't happening apparently), nothing would stop you or any other editor from doing a good faith nomination.  Its hard to tell somebody they shouldn't have done a nomination,  but since they did, we'll give them what they want.    --[[User:Thivierr|Rob]] 07:51, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 *'''Delete.''' While I agree the nom was made in bad faith, I agree he is not notable. [[User:Crunch|Crunch]] 04:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
 *<s>'''Weak delete''' per Dlyons493 and Crunch. It is a very immoral "revenge" for the AfDs filed against Jason Gastrich's articles, but this article is also not bery notable. [[User:Sycthos|Sycthos]][[User talk:Sycthos|<sup>Talk</sup>]] 04:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)</s>