Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kevin Roche, Sudbury

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 delete. Mailer Diablo 01:30, 20 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kevin Roche, Sudbury

See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Laurentian University Model Parliament and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LUPSA Presidents.

WP:VAIN. rehpotsirhc 05:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

  • Speedy delete as a non-notable bio. The group is barely on the edge of probably-not notable, the leader of the group is certainly not notable for his role in it, for the purposes of the enycylopedia. I already speedied this once, but I don't like to do such things twiceMak (talk) 05:10, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • I think this is justifiable. I am currently in the process of using Wikipedia as a means of producing an image of Laurentian University as a highly credible intellectual institution. It is my theory that if students can see how their university is reflected on the internet, it will stimulate them to become more participatory. So, by putting up my own article is not for the purpose to stroke my own ego, but to allow for students at Laurentian to feel a sense of legitimacy; which I think a valid consideration. To further improve the image of Laurentian University on Wikipedia, I have taken the liberty of the creation of the article on our President, Dr. Judith Woodsworth; as well, I have created entries on Dr. Rand Dyck; and, I have also created an article to focus credibility towards Huntington University, one of Laurentian's federated colleges. All of this is in an effort to legitimise Laurentian University, and to show solidarity, and a sense of community. kroche14
    • Comment There's a big difference. Dr. Woodsworth, a university president, is notable. You are not a university president. Fan1967 05:33, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment: Please see also WP:VAIN and WP:AUTO. I fear you may be creating a walled garden. Stifle (talk) 23:24, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
      • Commment: And Wikipedia is not a soapbox. Stifle (talk) 23:25, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete - nn-bio, fails WP:BIO. If you want your classmates to see how their university is reflected on the net, might I suggest improving your college/university's article. Cheers. --lightdarkness (talk) 05:21, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Bige1977 05:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete. I stand by my "keep" on the AfD for Laurentian University Model Parliament, but cannot support this entry in any way. I concur with darkness. Fluit 05:47, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, nn-bio. --Terence Ong 05:55, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete. Compeletely and totally non-notable. This belongs on a user talk page. It's just some dude. Tomb Ride My Talk 06:15, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Userfy If there is infact no user, then Delete. Ansell 06:40, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete nn, vanity. Fishhead64 07:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep the article: I am well aware of the absurdity in this situation. But again, this is a process. Shift happens, and, I firmly hold the view that by continuing to feature different people from the Laurentian University community on Wikipedia, that a greater sense of community within the city of Sudbury will be created. kroche14
  • Comment That's not the function of Wikipedia. Fishhead64 07:02, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment ...and there are many places in the world wide web where this would be appropriate. However, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Fan1967 14:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Perhaps you're unclear as to what Wikipedia is, Mr. Roche. It's not an indiscriminate blog or bulletin board, but a private encyclopedia with rules to assure that articles meet a minimum standard of notability; I strongly recommend you look at WP:BIO for those guidelines applicable to this situation, under which you not only fail to be notable, but do so in spectacular fashion. That being said, what Wikipedia is likewise not about is as a feelgood vehicle for residents of the city of Sudbury or your university. Speedy Delete per nom. RGTraynor 15:52, 14 April 2006 (UTC)


  • Response: Yes, you may be correct that Wikipedia is not "a feelgood vehicle for residents of the city of Sudbury or your university" but.... ideally it could be.kroche14
Comment No ideally it won't be. Wikipedia is not a free for all or for general webhosting. It is an encyclopedia. Please read WP:NOT and WP:N and then if you still think this article should stay pursuant to those pages, get back to us. JoshuaZ 19:07, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Comment. I'd like to strengthen my vote for delete on this one if that was possible. As the author/subject of the article your seeming complete lack of understanding or respect (I'm not sure witch) for the basics listed in WP:NOT is not helping your case. Tomb Ride My Talk 16:03, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete per the above, especially the comments by kroche14. Gwernol 15:11, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete con fuoco. WP:NOT anything original author thinks it is. Choose from the following: 1. a free webhost 2. an indiscriminate collection of links 3. a publisher of original thought 4. a soapbox. You can set up your own wiki on your own webhost if you'd like, kroche14. You can also head over to Wikicities and take a gander at their setups.  RasputinAXP  c 15:43, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable individual, as per WP:BIO and WP:VAIN. Sliggy 15:54, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Per sliggy and suggest to the makers of the article that they go join myspace or some similar website. JoshuaZ 18:54, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Despite the vanity of this particular article, the quality of this author's work on Judith Woodsworth suggests to me that he would be valuable to Wikipedia as a contibutor on an ongoing basis. Fan1967 19:57, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
It's certainly a solid article about a notable subject, well-written and sourced, and I commend the person who penned it -- it's a word-for-word copyvio from the president's bio on the Laurentian University website. [1] That being said, I've also listed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LUPSA Presidents as being even more of a vanity article than Roche's original one; this isn't merely an article about himself, it's an article about the presidency of the political science club he holds. RGTraynor 20:04, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
Whoops. Silly me. I just assumed he had written it. Pretty blatant copy, too. Fan1967 20:18, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Delete as vanity. Comment: In the spirit of not biting the newcomers, there could be a place of some of kroche14's material, just bear in mind that it will be cut down to verifiable encyclopedic content, not advertising or self-promotion. Peter Grey 20:19, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Certainly Judith Woodsworth is notable enough for an article, were one to be rewritten so as not to be a copyvio from the LU website. RGTraynor 08:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for "improving the image" of anything or to "legitimise" anything. Dpbsmith (talk) 01:45, 15 April 2006 (UTC)

Delete. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 70.53.1.107 (talk • contribs) .

  • Delete, of course. Adam Bishop 04:04, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete The explanation given by the author of this article is sufficient reason alone to delete this per WP:NOT


Strong Delete Rand Dyck, Judith Woodsworth, and The Laurentian Model Parliament are wonderful articles (the parts of them which doesnt violate copyright), since they are all notable people and events, but the President elect of a Student Organization is not notable enought to warrent a article. This is simply a case of vanity and self promotion. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 142.51.47.41 (talk • contribs) .

  • Delete, clearly doesn't pass WP:BIO, part of a walled garden. Stifle (talk) 23:22, 18 April 2006 (UTC)
    • Smerge into Laurentian University Model Parliament if that is kept. Stifle (talk) 23:24, 18 April 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.