Talk:William C. Rhodes

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the William C. Rhodes article. This is not a forum for general discussion about the article's subject.
Please sign and date your posts by typing four tildes (~~~~). Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Ask questions, get answers.	Be polite Assume good faith No personal attacks Be welcoming	Article policies No original research Neutral point of view Verifiability

This article was nominated for deletion on 2006-10-22. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] Notability

He's a CEO of a Fortune 500 company, which I feel makes him worthy of a stub. Berserkr731 09:24, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

Do not remove the fast-delete box without going through the full due process. Please remember that this is for admins to decide, not an individual user. If the admins agree with you, then the page will stay, if not, then it will go. Piuro 19:53, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

You're wrong, and after 10 days as a user you shouldn't try to tell other users what to do. If you want to delete an article with a clear assertion of notability, you shouldn't use speedy deletion tagging as your process in the first place. up+land 21:20, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

There, I have set up the full nomination for deletion process. Though I request that you please do not make personal attacks. Piuro 22:02, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

I didn't intentionally remove any boxes, but thanks for assuming that I am as petty as you. Berserkr731 02:15, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry I assumed it was you, since you were the person maintaining this article and since you made the initial comment reguarding this. However, I would greatly appreciate it if you would avoid personal attacks. Piuro 02:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

I just wanted to illustrate what a personal attack was... calling someone "wrong", giving the opinion that "after 10 days as a user you shouldn't try to tell other users what to do", and noting that Wikipedia procedure calls for an nn-warn tag before jumping to a db-bio as Tipsharru gave above are not personal attacks. Berserkr731 04:20, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

No, but "thanks for assuming that I am as petty as you." is. Piuro 04:49, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

True. That was the illustration of which I was speaking. Berserkr731 11:45, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

Not to assume bad faith, but I have a hard time believing that. Wither way, if the article remains, ill do my best to help contribute and make it a better article. Sound fair to you? Piuro 18:30, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

No, not really. I've already wasted enough time with this. Notability was already established by his position (as agreed by the majority on the page's afD entry). The added sources and references did nothing extra to establish his notability (they made it a better and more verifiable article, but these do not affect whether the entry should exist. His salary is largely irrelevant to that end). How the hell are we to give people access to the sum of all human knowledge when Fortune 500 CEOs are not even noteworthy enough to be included? It's pretty clear you have some sort of ulterior motive. Berserkr731 09:40, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Please keep your accusations to yourself, and you might want to check the deletion discussion before you go flinging conspiracy around. Piuro 18:59, 24 October 2006 (UTC)