Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl William Hansen

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was keep (no consensus). Sjakkalle (Check!) 11:09, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Carl William Hansen

An obscure historical figure, referenced in relation to Ordo Templi Orientis but of no obvious significance outside of that group. Just zis Guy you know? 22:33, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

For the voidance of doubt, merge works for me too. Just zis Guy you know? 16:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:HOLE. Stifle (talk) 11:02, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

• My reading of WP:HOLE is that it is not to be used as an argument for deletion, rather, it explains the need to address some poorly written articles. What is your understanding of this? -MrFizyx 22:22, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. Considering that he died in 1936, the 80 Google hits for "Carl William Hansen" Kadosh seem sufficient. True, he's not notable outside his OTO activities but he founded an OTO branch in a country, that's something. AnonEMouse 15:35, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. A significant contribution to his field has been made, he is notable within it, and wikipedia is for the sharing of knowledge don't you know. This knowledge is worthwhile. Therefore it should be kept. Benjaminstewart05 12:10, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

• Keep, notable enough, significant enough to deserve own article. Vizjim 15:31, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Slight Merge way obscure. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 15:54, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, notable OTO figure. More notable than some of the neo-Nazis we have articles on. ergot 15:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge, as it has already been established that this person has no notability outside of the OTO. Since the article contains little other information, a merge seems particularly appropriate. -- Kicking222 16:14, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into Ordo Templi Orientis per JzG. Founding an OTO branch (and several other Templar-wannabe groups) is not in my opinion notable enough for a bio article without proof that it influenced a lot of people (such as the "audience of 5000" guideline for performers). Writing the pseudonymous tract cited in the article is in my opinion only notable enough for a bio if there are substantial citations showing influence. Most stuff about secret societies, especially ones whose spiel is mystical, comes through sources that are POV and not externally verifiable. Barno 18:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep (or merge at a pinch). The article claims he was in Who's Who; can this be verified? — Haeleth Talk 19:06, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
• keep: Obscure, but notable enough. -MrFizyx 22:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.