Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Schulenburg

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 delete. Mailer Diablo 12:54, 31 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Schulenburg

Possible vanity, autobiography, and asserts no notablity. Article claims he is a "youth pastor." Fails to meet WP:Bio criteria. Arbusto 02:17, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. 53 non-omitted results on Google, but 554 total. Can't really find much about him, though. If his article is deleted, his references should be removed from August 26, 1969, 26 August, and August_26th. They all just give his birthday, and if he's non-notable, those are too. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flyne (talk • contribs).
• Delete per nom. --Kchase02 (T) 06:58, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - author of two unreleased books, notability not yet asserted on other grounds. Colonel Tom 12:22, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nonentity, posible vanity --DV8 2XL 12:43, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Comment What is the significance of "first president of the Alpha Omega Foundation" and "The Church Report, May 2006, "The Top 20 Youth Ministers"", as well as "an innovative program at Wooddale Church called Pizza and God Talk that is being duplicated by churches all across America"? I don't know, but would like an informed response from someone conversant with this area before deciding either way on an article, as they seem viable credentials. Tyrenius 15:10, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. The unbelieving editors on Wikipedia, such as Arbustoo, do not have the integrity or maturity to allow such an entry to stay on Wikipedia without distorting and perverting it beyond recognition. Given enough time, he and the others, who have a similar reputation for biased editing by trying to defame Christians, would only remove pertinent information, while opining on some 8th grade fight in the lunch room or editorializing about some alleged, college experimentation, ruining the article, and further lowering the overall integrity of Wikipedia. Therefore, it is certainly best if we delete this article. --Brian Faulken 06:47, 27 May 2006 (UTC)
  • Personal attacks are not helpful. Perhaps if you could show how Mr. Schulenburg meets WP:BIO we can have an, er, "enlightened" discussion of the matter. B.Wind 00:17, 29 May 2006 (UTC)
  • +1. Especially coming from a christian (i assume). Even if not, you are defaming the name of christians in general by making a personal attack in support of keeping a christian article. THE KING 04:49, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
    • You two can say what you want, but you're both dreaming. I've seen plenty from Arbustoo and others to confirm these suspicions and if you were honest and weren't either smypathesizers or part of the problem, you'd publicly agree with me. --Brian Faulken 04:53, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
      • But to the point, are you saying he's sufficiently notable to merit an article or not? Tyrenius 20:48, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete clearly fails to meet WP:BIO. Maybe after his books are released. Eluchil404 21:02, 30 May 2006 (UTC)
• Delete nobody in particular. He will still be n.i.p. even after the books are published; getting books published is no big deal. Wile E. Heresiarch 05:05, 31 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.