Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Kevgas

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 DELETE Gamaliel 05:21, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

[edit] George Kevgas

• Delete Vanity --DaveC 23:26, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Page is not made by subject; will be expanded. -- Mystache
• Userfy if the appropriate user page can be identified (according to the article, Kevgas is known for being a hard core Wikipedian), Delete otherwise. It doesn't matter who the author is; the subject is not notable. Android79 02:41, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, vanity. Megan1967 05:44, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I am one of the original creators of this page. I can vouch that George Kevgas does indeed spend most of this day searching Wikipedia. He also carry's an unique bit of notability around Seton Hall University's Campus. If anyone has ever heard of Facebook which is a online directory that connects social groups at colleges and universitys, under this Seton Hall group there is actually a George Kevgas fan club. George Kevgas himself did not created the page. It is not Vanity. Once again I was one of the original authors of the page. If anyone has any questions I urge you to contact me at my office at McCarter & English, LLP in Newark, NJ. My email is EMCKEOWN@MCCARTER.COM I urge you all not to vote to delete this page. It is not vanity since George Kevgas himself did not create it. Mr. Kevgas is someone who many people love and admire at Seton Hall University. Thank you. -- Doc13mets
• Delete Being the unwilling subject of this article, I would wholeheartedly agree that the subect is not notable. The page was made by classmates of mine at Seton Hall, namely those two preceeding users who have voted to keep the article. In addition, while not explicit, it could be construed as a personal attack; some of the statements, while sounding vaguely neutral, are actually meant as inside jokes at my expense to then be enjoyed by themselves and others who might know me. I would argue that they do indeed have excess spare time on their hands to be creating encyclopedic articles about a mundane undergraduate student. I have already removed the elements of the article that were the primary sources of my disparagement, but did not wish to completely blank the page. I suggest deleting this article at the earliest possible convenience and would like to apologize for these individuals' inability to fill their spare time with more productive activities. Please refer any questions through my Wikipedia account. --hellenica 10:08, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • In that case, this article should probably be Speedy Deleted. Android79 13:15, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
• If you look at the history of the page, Mr. Kevgas in and of himself edits it, suggesting that he doesn't want the page to deleted, just that he wants to obfuscate the facts contained herein. -- Unsigned comment by Mystache
  • You only get one vote. A "Speedy Keep" is different from a Keep; it means you think this VfD nomination was made in bad faith, which is clearly not the case. (Whether or not your vote(s) will be taken at face value is another matter entirely, as most of your edits are to the article in question and this VfD discussion.) Also, please sign your posts with ~~~~. Android79 15:10, Mar 16, 2005 (UTC)
    • Right. So noted. -- Mystache
• Delete as either attack page or vanity. I don't care which it is, either way delete it. Radiant_* 09:48, Mar 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for good reasons noted by others above. Dpbsmith (talk) 15:35, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Attack page or vanity, not notable. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:26, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  • • I must also once again note this page was not made in vain and did not have any inside jokes. I asked Mr. Kevgas today to tell me what inside jokes were in it, he had no response. Just because you think an article does not have any notibility does not mean thats true. Mr. Kevgas is an extreamly humble human being and would not ever want such an honor bestowed upon himself. He is not only known throught-out the Seton Hall Community as practically a living legend, but he is also known in many other schools involved with their own particular Model United Nations programs and these people have never even met him! I have gone to conferences and mentioned George's name and people have come up to me and said "You know George Kevgas?" "I hear George Kevgas is an author is it true?" He honestly is a living legend around the Model United Nations Circuit and that does encompass a large group of people. George has inspired many "MUNers". George Kevgas is a humble person, but a large portion of people do believe he belongs in Wikipedia, if you doubt that, I challenge you to come to Seton Hall's Campus one day and see for your self. Doc13mets 22:15, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • I would like now to quote some exact phrases in Wikipedia’s policy’s. “If you are reasonably significant, someone will create an article about you sooner or later”. There are many of us that feel Kevgas should have a Wikipedia article. I have talked to many people and they are even willing to start a petition if that would help the cause, just let me know where to send it. Many people do believe Mr. Kevgas is ineed reasonably significant. I would ask unless you yourself are heavily involved in the North East Model United Nations Circuit to not comment on this matter. Doc13mets 22:27, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, non-notable. Doc13mets, it is ridiculous to say that only people in a realm just barely notable in its own right can judge the notability of this. Moderately notable individuals within a barely notable phenomenon do not deserve individual articles. -- Jmabel | Talk 06:01, Mar 18, 2005 (UTC)
  • • Thank you Jmabel made my point... "Moderately notable individuals"... they are still NOTABLE... Moderate or not, they are still NOTABLE and at one time remember, thinking the world was round, was a barely notable phenomenon. Doc13mets 07:53, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    • Also to make the point that Model UN is a barely notable phenomenon is ridiculous such famous notables are Samuel L. Jackson and Chelsea Clinton. Doc13mets 15:02, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • Well, I'm pretty sure I know how this vote is going to turn out, but to put this in a better perspective for our two objectors: If we look at the Boy Scouts of America, we can all agree that they deserve an article as a notable group. However, very few actual Boy Scouts are noteworthy enough to warrant an article solely on the basis of their standing within that organization. --66.92.248.254 15:30, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
      • Good point, but I must object to the fact that I highly doubt a boy scout from say North Jersey is actually known as far away as Montreal, Quebec. Mr. Kevgas does hold this stature. I do not believe your point also works on Mr. Kevgas.Doc13mets 16:03, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• As a Model UN alum myself, I have to say that Model UN was a notable experience in my life. As far as WP is concerned, however, I cannot see how this article is even remotely notable, outside of a small circle of friends (or enemies, as applicable). Delete. Edeans 22:32, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• Keep I agree with Mystache in this. I know George, and I can also vouch for the authenticity of the article. unsigned vote from User:Spartacusprime

• User's first day

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.