Wikipedia:Votes for deletion/List of notable eccentrics

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 - no consensus

[edit] List of notable eccentrics

See talk page for my comments. Revolver 23:46, 2 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Inherantly POV. Delete. --jpgordon{gab} 01:08, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Eccentric is a very subjective term. I'm sure for every person on Earth there is someone else who would consider them eccentric. Delete. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 01:26, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• We have a listing of Films considered the worst ever page, which is likewise inherantly POV. Suggest we rename this to List of individuals who are famous for being widely considered to be eccentric, purge the list of people famous for other reasons and keep. C'mon, we need more content for Wikipedia:Unusual_articles. [[User:GeorgeStepanek|GeorgeStepanek\^talk ]] 01:57, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Thats not POV. Take "Plan 9 From Outer Space". I don't know if its bad, I've not seen it. I do know, however, that it is widely considered extremely bad. That main people consider it to be extremely bad is an incontrovertible fact. NPOV. -- GWO
• Delete: Inherently POV -- another "List" article that's just a trivia trap. Geogre 01:58, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, far too subjective to be useful in an encyclopedia - Cdc 03:03, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete, same as what Livajo said. [[User:Mo0|Mo0[talk]]] 06:36, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Can someone come out with the more correct term for so-called eccentric people? List of people who behave against orthodox cultural norms in such an extent that the other people consider them unusual although they may have just decided to do unusual things for their own personal reasons or something to that effect? Other terms like village idiot, crank and fool would be rather unsuitable. I do think that some of the additions to the list are incorrect - various rulers and people whose behavior is more of a show than anything else, for example. Note that this is a second time the page has been listed in the VfD (see talk - Skysmith
• Delete. subjective. --MPerel 09:33, Dec 3, 2004 (UTC)
• I think there's a danger of strictly applying the criteria and ending up removing everything that's interesting. Rename in accordance with GeorgeStepanek's suggestion and keep. Dbiv 12:54, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep - it doesnt has to be objective in this case. This is list of people who are considered eccentric - I mean, by most of people, by media and such. One might disagree with that, yes, but in same way some might disagree that Holocaust was a tragedy or that Hitler was dictator (cause he was elected) - but in the list of tragedies or dictators these still could be listed. Same here.
  • • (Above comment by User:DeirYassin)
  • Now that's one of the weirdest instantiations of Godwin's law that I've ever seen. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 16:05, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Firstly, just because a leader was elected doesn't mean that leader is not a dictator (=an absolute ruler) and I can't see any criteria that would discount the Holocaust from being considered a tragedy (=a disastrous event). Even so, these words, which have pretty straightforward and objective meanings, don't have any relevance to the word "eccentric", which dictionary.com defines as departing from a recognized, conventional, or established norm or pattern. Since these norms vary between cultures, subcultures, genders, age groups, social classes, families, etc. this term is too subjective for Wikipedia. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 17:28, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    • This is not my opinion by the way, I just given a comparison - maybe not the best one but if I'd think for enough time I would be able to tell better one, that many of possible lists are actually based on point of view rather than facts. As for holocaust not being tragedy, some anti-semitic person might say it's good that Jews died... Of course in that case it would be a small minority, but still, everything is relative. Now we see inquisition as bad for example and maybe the future generations will look at our prisons, death penalties and such in the same way. (I am not saying they would, jthat is just a possibility). DeirYassin 16:02, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Subjective, and lists like this are unmaintainable. Jayjg 17:06, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Strong keep. Listophobes strike again! That there are nice eccentrics and horrific eccentrics is not the point. This is a fascinating list and a very good job. --Pgreenfinch 17:54, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Inherently POV and/or original research. anthony 警告 18:40, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• delete. could be argued as too inclusive/exclusive by some if kept, and its subjective. Fledgeling 21:48, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, not like any of the people listed would object to being included into such a list. Grue 15:05, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. POV and unencyclopedic. Indrian 23:47, Dec 4, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep and adopt GeorgeStepanek's proposal to rename this article. Of course "eccentric" is a subjective term, but that doesn't make this article unencyclopedic. If we should delete an article just because it deals with a "subjective term," just think of what articles we'd lose: terrorism, dictator, love, the list goes on. This article needs a lot of work, including a less POV definition of "eccentric." Still, it's a fascinating article that doesn't need to be deleted. --Szyslak 01:16, 5 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Delete (unless the article is renamed and significantly re-written to NPOV). -- FirstPrinciples 07:03, Dec 5, 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Mark Richards 01:44, 6 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. Paul August 22:19, Dec 6, 2004 (UTC)
• Delete finally an article I could appear in, but alas so could anyone notable, as everyone is eccentric by someone's standards. examples: Benjamin Franklin, Ralph Nader, Donald Trump, the entire staff of Jesus de la Luz, every person registered in the Drop Acid not Bombs political party, etc. plus everyone else. Pedant 18:44, 2004 Dec 7 (UTC)
• Keep. Xtreme! 01:21, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Note that this user is most likely a sock, as his first edit was about 2 hours before this one and has made several single-word VfD votes within the span of a couple minutes. [[User:Livajo|力伟|☺]] 01:29, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Keep. The term is subjective to a degree, but some persons (such as Howard Hudges) do qualify as weirdos by any definition. The list does have value if its bar is set high enough, the question apparently is whether or not that can be done. I say yes. -- Kizor 09:54, 8 Dec 2004 (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.