Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Bronson (prisoner)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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, the nominator withdrew his delete vote as well. Sjakkalle 08:52, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Bronson (prisoner)

Nominate & vote Del but no vote on this guy who's evidently done nothing but

  1. get imprisoned for hurting someone,
  2. parlay it into a life sentence by hurting enough of those he encounters in prison,
  3. codify his scheme for staying in condition to hurt people, and
  4. win the love of a prison-groupie missionary.

This bio is essentially an orphan:

  1. LoPbN entry: "Bronson, Charles, aka Michael Peterson"
  2. bottom-of-page dab on the real Charles Bronson's bio
  3. casual example cited in a WP titling dispute.

(Could we transWiki it to WikiMuseum of Futility?)
--Jerzy (t) 21:10, 2005 Mar 30 & 22:54, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)

  • No vote -- Template:vfd header was missing from article -- I added it. FreplySpang (talk) 22:32, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Charles Bronson was once classified as the most dangerous prisoner in the UK penal system. --GRider\talk 00:18, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, notorious prisoner. Gets nearly as high a google rank as the other one. Kappa 00:57, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Lamentable though it is that some people are fascinated with characters of this type, this is one of the most famous criminals in the UK - more famous than some British serial killers. Wincoote 01:15, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep for reasons cited above. Mgm|(talk) 08:26, Mar 31, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, again for same reasons as above. -- Karada 08:31, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: he seems to have a fan club. Policy question: should notoriety equate to notability? --bainer 09:01, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Only if wikipedia aims for a Neutral Point Of View Kappa 11:57, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • I nominated, but i've shifted in light of the evidence of notoriety. (The fan club is evidence of something else than notoriety....) Be careful what you "equate", but, yes, notoriety is notable. I don't claim to be able to evaluate the notability of his notoriety, now that P.T. Barnum's supposed dictum has been proved again: "No one ever went broke by underestimating the intelligence of the American public." (But some people, including me, make fools of themselves by overestimating the intelligence of the English-speaking peoples. And that only increases my contempt for this person.) I was mistaken in assuming i could tell that he was non-notable; others will decide whether he is notable enough for his article to deserve more respect than he does. --Jerzy (t) 22:54, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
  • No vote from nominator. See Comment thread immediately above. --Jerzy (t) 22:54, 2005 Mar 31 (UTC)
  • Keep Encyclopedic, meaningfully relates to Actor Charles Bronson as a dimension of his fame. Sniffandgrowl 03:52, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Infamous in UK, often featured by 'The Sun', a publicity seeking convict. The page deserves to be improved to include his poetry and bizarre hostage demands (an 'inflatable doll').
  • Keep. Appears to be notorious UK criminal over long period of time. Capitalistroadster 11:28, 1 Apr 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.