Talk:David Pearce (philosopher)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material of any kind that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article. [FAQ]

[edit] Deletion discussion

This article has been listed on Wikipedia:Votes for deletion in the past. See /deletion for the discussion archive.

• This article was listed and survived again. See: talk:David Pearce/Delete2. Wile E. Heresiarch 19:15, 18 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• November 2004 deletion debate.

• It was repeatedly claimed that the article was a vanity page. That claim was subsequently used to justify the deletion attempt. This claim is manifestly false, as I wrote a substantial part of the article, and as I am neither David Pearce nor an "associate" of his. Since the claim is false, the deletion attempt was, and will remain, unjustified. Please consider this before taking further action. Sir Paul 14:57, Dec 7, 2004 (UTC)

I agree. He's notable enough for Hedweb and Herbweb to merit a wiki article. Rad Racer 17:52, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Note that the article itself seems to state that Sir Paul (who's personal webpage says he is Pablo) is an associate of David Pearce. Also note with subject's 2000 self refrential websites which are essentially spamdexing, its more then unlikely that this page itself can become the target for further spamdexing by the person.

I wasn't an "associate" of his at the time the accusations where made, nor for that matter when I wrote the comments above. The key issue here is that claims to delete the article were made without anyone taking the trouble to verify them. If you are going to remove an entry, at least make sure you get the facts right. Sir Paul 16:19, 18 January 2006 (UTC)

• Another WP:AFD, result was keep. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Pearce (philosopher). Petros471 17:28, 17 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merge from BLTC Research

BLTC Research is not notable enough to stand on its own as an article, and should therefore be merged into this article. There's just not enough out there about it outside of the gazillion websites operated by this guy (and related people) which all have the same basic information which sounds like a press release. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 23:46, 11 December 2006 (UTC)