Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Burch

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was no consensus (thus keep). Borderline case, two delete votes by well-established WPians (Willmcw and Friday) plus the implied by the nominator (also well established) plus ones by WinOne4TheGipper and anonymous contributors, against two weak keep votes. Keeping because of "when in doubt, don't delete". -- Jitse Niesen (talk) 23:50, 17 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ben Burch

Vanity article, either delete or merge with USER:BenBurchuser page for Mr. Burch. Wikipedia:Vanity_page Dominick 18:18, 4 October 2005 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep - seems to be a notable person, and notable people are eligible for articles. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 18:58, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't see any real notability. Further, this page seems to be an attack page rather than a vanity. Either way, it serves little useful purpose. -Willmcw 19:33, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • !!!Delete it!!! - Ben is an admitted attention whore. Let him get his attention on DU and not waste Wikipedia's bandwidth on him.
    • What the heck is DU? --Daniel C. Boyer 20:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
      • Democratic Underground where apparently Burch is a participant according to the article. --Metropolitan90 21:26, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
        • The history of this article contains text that expands upon who this person is, and I Googled some of that info to confirm. He's "notable enough" for an article, IMHO. He's not merely a DU participant. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 21:43, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. The person is an unknown. It serves no purpose.
  • Very weak keep. Webmaster position barely, barely could provide excuse for notability. But I make this vote quite reluctantly, and article is in desperate need of expansion. --Daniel C. Boyer 20:21, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Little known person of zero importance. User:WinOne4TheGipper
  • Speedy as CSD:A7.Delete No assertion of notability that goes past what 10,000 other people have done with their lives.--Isotope23 21:27, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Do not speedy because the article at least makes a claim of notability, and hence does not fall under A7.CastAStone 22:34, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Who the hell is this guy? His article seems to be simply a bunch of sentences on a prostitute enthusiast. I didn't realize paying for sex made someone notable...
      • Current version at least tries to establish notability. changing my vote.--Isotope23 00:05, 5 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment. I reverted the article to a slightly better version, but it still offers little claim of notability. According to Alexa, the "traffic Rank for whiterosesociety.org: 118,696".[1] -Willmcw 22:00, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, I see no real assertion of notability. There's also nothing verifiable. Friday (talk) 22:16, 4 October 2005 (UTC)
  • DELETE! The guy is a total perv and an attention whore....
  • Comment - Note please that I did not create this entry myself. This was created by somebody attempting to smear Democratic Underground by pointing out my sexworker's rights activism (which was written about in Salon long ago) and very "out" bisexuality. I have no opinion about whether this ought to be kept or not. Decide that on whatever you think the merits are. BenBurch 16:49, 9 October 2005 (UTC)
    • Mr. Burch, this also isn't directed at you. Most people would take it an insult to be told they are NOT notable. Thanks for not taking this personally, most people can see it is not. Dominick 13:07, 10 October 2005 (UTC)
      • I'm about the least notable person I know, Dominick. I just try to get other people's voices heard. BenBurch 16:46, 10 October 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.