Talk:Daniel Wayne Smith
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page. | ||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.) |
||
 |
This article was nominated for deletion on 2006-09-11. The result of the discussion was keep. |
Contents |
[edit] Should not be deleted
I don't think this article should be deleted. His death is very notable. Every news website in the world is writing about it. EliasAlucard|Talk 18:25, 11 Sept, 2006 (UTC+1)
[edit] Re: Should not be deleted
Agreed--at least for the time being.Sectryan 16:33, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Archibald99 16:34, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Reasons stated above. EliasAlucard|Talk 18:41, 11 Sept, 2006 (UTC+1)
- Merge Neither...he isn't that notable in the past to warrant an article...not much to say, this can go along with Anna Nicole Smith. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Flyintothesky (talk • contribs).
- Comment Okay, I know Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, but if you'll allow me to do a little bit of my own personal fortune-telling... The latest news on the topic hints that there may have been foul play involved. If it turns out that Smith was murdered, then he probably will end up warranting his own article a la Nicole Brown Simpson. If not, then this probably turns into a clear "merge". Sure, every major media outlet is reporting it now, but if the kid just died of a congenital heart defect or something, nobody's going to be talking about it by the end of next week. So I guess what I'm saying is, it's hard to tell right now. --Jaysweet 19:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- If I was forced to put down my crystal ball, then I guess I'd vote Merge. --Jaysweet 19:39, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
- Maybe with the latest developments with Anna Nicole, we should put more consideration into the proposed merger. Sectryan 17:36, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
-
- Uh, also note that there was already an AfD discussion and the result was Keep... so I think we're all arguing in the wrong place ;p --Jaysweet 19:48, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
Robert Lowry: I do not think it should be deleted or merged.
-
- FYI -- Now that homicide and suicide have both been ruled out, I think the notability of this is going to decline rapidly. It was rejected for AfD fairly just a week ago, but I intend to propose deletion again fairly soon (basically, as soon as this drops of the CNN headlines). It can be merged with the Anna Nicole article. --Jaysweet 03:50, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
I think a good question to ask in relation to the deletion question is this: Can this article ever be expanded to the point where it could be considered for featured status? —Malber (talk • contribs) 20:29, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
New comment: The Inquest on the death of Daniel is going to be coming up this March. There are also many people hinting at possible criminal charges being filed if in fact Howard K. Stern was to blame. Plus with Anna Nicole's death and all the news about that I really don't think this article should be deleted. I forsee more info to come as the Inquest isn't closed court, with the hype on AN's death, everyone will flock to that as well. 02-14-07 BriarRose
[edit] methadone
Dr. Wecht was making the rounds of the media today (February 8, 2007). He confirms that there still no information as to where Daniel got the methadone from (nobody has admitted to writing a perscription) or why he might of have been taking it. 63.3.5.2 22:52, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Name of article
Why Daniel Wayne Smith? That's not how he was known. Someone explain this to me. I assume there are other Daniel Smiths. But why not Daniel Smith (?????), fill in the question marks with something appropriate? Wouldn;t that be better? -FateSmiled&DestinyLaughed 04:20, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Text of the will
It seems like it would be more appropriate for the text of the will to appear in Wikisource, with a link from here... doncha think? --Jaysweet 21:07, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- I put it in and I sorta care a little - it is only two paragraphs with the salient points from the horses mouth which I found preferable to: According to the Florida court as reported on cnn blah and blah. Covers the same territory in about as much space. the whole will is umpteen pages, thats not what is here. But I also did it because I thought the dating was peculiar : original post had "The copy contains the date 02/03/2007 02:18 followed by 8188805985 RAR above each page, indicating that the copy was made five days before she died. Each page is initialed VLM. The will declares...etc.(italics were not in original post -just for emphasis now) So that little sentence was removed somewhere along the line. It struck me as peculiar because five days before she died they make a copy of a will that was six years old. Thats one hell of a coincidence or at least so it seemed to me. Its just one more little factoid that doesn't quite make sense . So I leave it at that. 68.102.7.125 doctored the will to read F Lee and then somebody fixed that back but also removed the date thing, I don't follow this page too closely, but theres' my reasons.68.60.68.203 02:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
