Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin A. Sabet
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 in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was keep. Johnleemk | Talk 14:37, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Kevin_A._Sabet
the writer of the page has received annoying/harrasing emails; the writer of the page does not want this information available on the www —This unsigned comment was added by Oxford1 (talk • contribs) .
Comment I am the subject of the page. I am not concerned with info being inappropriate/unreliable, I just do not want to be subject to so many harassing emails, etc. It is a little frightening that you all are so concerned and invested into this article! —This unsigned comment was added by 151.197.60.186 (talk • contribs) .
-
- Response: You need not be frightened. This is pretty much standard operating procedure when someone wants an article deleted. Several of us - including me - are simply not understanding why Oxford1 wants this article deleted when you (assuming you are really the subject) seem to be notable. His explanation is very confusing. —Wknight94 (talk) 21:48, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Response: Sorry you are receiving so many emails. Perhaps it would help to think about the fact that it is your notoriety which is spawning the emails. Wikipedia simply tries to document all persons of note, so it isn't directly the cause of these emails. -- cmh 16:51, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
- Comment I will likely vote delete, in view of the ostensible non-notability of the subject, but surely the reason given in the nomination is categorically insufficient for deletion. While the creator of a page certainly may make a case for deletion when he/she is the only author, this page has been edited (albeit not substantively) by sundry individuals, and it is not for the creator of the page to determine exclusively and individually its proper disposition. The information on the page does not appear to be OR and does appear to be available elsewhere on the Internet, in view of which fact it doesn't seem at all appropriate to consider whether the author (or subject) of the page desires that the information should be on the Internet. Joe 23:45, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
Speedy Keep, clearly notable political activist. The rationale for deletion is clearly specious; the subject put personal information online last week in connection with an opinion piece for a Vancouver newspaper, including his picture. Not that this article needs all those pictures of him. Monicasdude 00:50, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I am adding {{not verified}} -- cmh 01:09, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Keep: Is this the same guy as here? If so, being on CNN certainly seems notable no matter how you slice it. The fact that he's now angry at his Wikipedia notoriety just adds entertainment to the mix. Any chance you could post some of those annoying/harrassing e-mails somewhere so we can all enjoy? ;) And hey, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit - I welcome Mr. Sabet to come and fix whatever is troubling him here. —Wknight94 (talk) 01:11, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- If this is going to be "Kept", may I suggest that an experienced editor goes through this to remove the 2 layers of POV, one clearly directed towards supportin gthe subject, the other towards denegrating him. -- 62.25.109.196 08:22, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- The best way to ensure that is done is to do it yourself. —Wknight94 (talk) 11:46, 24 March 2006 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is not striving to present no points of view. Instead, it tries to present all points of view without undue weight on either. If you tackle this, it might be better to group contentious points into sections and present both sides of the debate. See WP:NPOV for more of these subtleties. -- cmh 17:01, 24 March 2006 (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.
