Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Geraghty

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was KEEP. —Korath (Talk) 12:55, Mar 3, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Jim Geraghty

Once again, delete this on the basis of non-notability. -- Riffsyphon1024 09:10, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Main discussion: Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/Jim geraghty If that article survives VfD, it would be turned into a redirect to the correctly capitalized article. Carrp | Talk 14:16, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• If there are wikipedia entries for other contributors to NRO, why not Geraghty too? Especially since he did have some involvement in other note worthy wikipedia matters (i.e., the Killian Documents/CBS-Rather controversy). The entry is factually correct. 25 Feb. 2005
• The above remark by 63.225.174.87. And, as Carrp says, please refer to the discussion on Jim geraghty for details. Oh and btw, merely being factually correct does not necessarily merit inclusion in an encyclopedia. It also has to be informative. Radiant! 20:53, Feb 25, 2005 (UTC)
  • Well, no, it has to be verifiable - David Gerard 13:52, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Oops, wrong link, I meant Wikipedia:Informative. I agree that an article needs Wikipedia:Verifiability. Btw, the latter links to the former as another part of policy, the third part being Wikipedia:Neutral. Radiant! 10:53, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, vote unchanged on this as before. Megan1967 23:14, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Borderline keep - needs better verifiability, but probably an article worthy person - David Gerard 13:52, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. If you are going to delete this entry then thousands of other entries should be deleted too. As for verifiability, there are hyperlinks to other wikipedia entries, to NRO and to Geraghty's archives. (Posted by anon 24.18.59.229)
• Keep, barely also - The information is verifiable, and the guy is not entirely non-notable. – ClockworkSoul 15:39, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - I read the Kerry Spot frequently and I understand it won a prize in the Washington Post blog competition held last year. Capitalistroadster 08:10, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Just another blogger. This guy was about as involved in the Killian memos issue as the editors who worked on Killian documents. Gamaliel 04:35, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.