Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Saklad

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Postdlf 06:51, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Don Saklad

Tagged as a speedy by User:Lucky 6.9 with the reason "Please tell me this doesn't have to stay up here for five days. Please." Sorry, but none of the Criteria for Speedy Deletion are fulfilled. But here is a delete vote for non-notability. Sjakkalle (Check!) 10:39, 13 July 2005 (UTC)

New users please read: You are welcome to comment but please add your comments to the bottom of the page (not the top) and sign them by adding four tildes (~) which will automatically add your username or IP address and the time and date. Please do not alter the comments or votes of others; this is considered vandalism and grounds for blocking. Please do not comment or vote multiple times pretending you are different people; such comments and votes will be deleted or ignored. Read this for more information. Thank you.

  • Delete notability not established. JamesBurns 10:46, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, non-notable kook. Dcarrano 17:18, July 13, 2005 (UTC)

i'm confused. is the writer[1] being defined as a notable kook or me? which makes me[2] notable again. but what do i know about these things? oh well.-- dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu 04:36, 14 July 2005 (UTC)

  • Delete nn, not verifiable. Friday 20:54, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete if all this guy does is post in blogs...nn. --Etacar11 00:34, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Explicitly states that he is non-notable in first sentence. ~ WCFrancis 00:53, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Move to User talk:Donwarnersaklad where people can contribute writing for the don saklad obsessives.-- dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu 04:38, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
Are we sure that User:Donwarnersaklad is actually Don? Yeah, I know, it can be hard to tell... -- Kaszeta 14:20, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
I'm sure that the person writing the User:Donwarnersaklad material isn't actually Don Saklad (if it's Don's account, he's letting someone use it). It's not in the real Don's writing style. -- Seth Finkelstein
somebody's figured out that i got a cutout -- dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu 16:57, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. He's been a long-time eccentric usenet personality, and has plenty of web pages dedicated to him [3][4][5], unlike your typical small-potatoes run-of-the mill kook. He also seems to get around, I've seen him on Slashdot[6], Livejournal[7], and even here. If Archimedes Plutonium gets a page, Don deserves one too. -- Kaszeta 14:20, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • (Invalid vote) Strong Keep for me too. I am one of the moderators of a well-established library-related listserv that is one of the few places his posts are welcome, per listserv policy. Don is weird, and in the multitude of places he posts his stuff, it is rarely on point. But there is something notable about being the town crazy. He forms a kind of reality check for the rest of us. I believe in this respect he has achieved a kind of notability that is worthy of inclusion. Like his posts, you don't have to read his entry if you aren't interested. James Quinn --Jamesiegod 18:21, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • First edit.
  • Delete. I remember this guy from some library listservs I used to be on, but he's just some troll. Gamaliel 18:23, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete nn per Etacar11 --Gunmetal 21:51, 14 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I agree with Jamesiegod and Kaszeta. Don's likely just as famous as Jessamyn_West, and we do keep information on trolls you know. John Hubbard 12:39, July 15, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable internet personality. JZ 00:14, 16 July 2005 (UTC)
  • (Invalid vote - please log in if this is the correct user). Agree with above user, notable internet personality. skye 22:20, 16 July 2005 (UTC) (vote actually by 24.86.37.105 (talk • contribs))
  • (Invalid vote) Strong Keep. Don Saklad is very prolific and well-known on the Internet. --Takeel 17:22, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • First edit.
  • Okay, so my vote was marked "first edit", and the informal policy that goes with that cheeses me off enough in itself...but why was it also marked with the words "invalid vote"? Same reason? --Takeel 22:05, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • I'm also cheesed that somebody edited my own vote text, but I'm not about to start an edit war over it. Just wanted to make my displeasure known. --Takeel 22:20, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • It's actually not a vote. You are currently allowed to comment but not vote. In time your vote will always count. - Tεxτurε 22:24, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
  • That's such arcane criteria. That looks like criteria made up by throwing dice. -- dsaklad@zurich.csail.mit.edu
  • I've looked for the policy page that mentions this, and I couldn't find it. Could I please be pointed in its general direction? --Takeel 00:37, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
  • (Invalid vote) Keep. Not your run-of-the-mill nutcase. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 66.92.73.215 (talk • contribs) 21:15, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, entirely non notable. Hall Monitor 21:20, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Being a prolific poster around the internet is not grounds for inclusion in an encyclopedia. Indrian 15:58, July 19, 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete - non-notable / vanity - Tεxτurε 19:53, 19 July 2005 (UTC)
  • (Invalid vote) keep - he's a well-known kook with a long history of kookness 24.24.44.7 01:13, 20 July 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_Don_Saklad_4379.html"