Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Dirkhising

Jesse Dirkhising

non notable as made clear in the first patragraph, and as a murder victim how does this help make a better encyclopedia?, SqueakBox 03:01, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep yay! I'm the first vote for this! Nominator seems to have been thwarted from editing efforts so has resorted to AfD process. Subject of article is certainly notable and the murder/investigation got national attention in mainstream media. Isn't that enough? Benjiboi 03:04, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment Speedy? And you are the second person with a vote not the first. The opening says it has received minimal press coverage. This person wasnt notable otherwise and was murdered through no fault of their own and this article is distasteful. But either way its no speedy, SqueakBox
Speedy keep Nominator trying to WP:POINT. Fighting for Justice 03:39, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Please stop attacking me for the hundredth time and you persist in spite of having been warned twice about it. You are completely wrong about my motives. It would be nice to have a reason wwhy the article should be kept instead of spouting venom which doesnt address the issyue at hand, SqueakBox 03:44, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep. Nominator is obviously making WP:POINT per above users. No solid rationale given for deletion. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps)))} 03:46, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not attacking you Squeakbox. All people have to do is follow your edits, read your comments and edit summary and they will know you are trying to WP:POINT.

CommentThat is simply not the case, as the warnings re your behaviour towards me make clear. I am enforcing policy and while I understand you dont like that I would suggest you re-read your user page and start living up to those fine words, SqueakBox 03:53, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sure you are. A policy you invented. Fighting for Justice 03:58, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment While it is possible the concerns about this editor may be valid (or they may be invalid), I don't feel this AFD is the proper forum to address them. Perhaps it might be better to reserve comments to the subject of this article and take up that discussion elsewhere? Such as WP:RFC/U? Mister.Manticore 03:59, 27 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]