Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark K. Bilbo

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 speedy keep - bad faith nomination. FCYTravis 04:49, 23 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Mark K. Bilbo

Mark Bilbo simply isn't notable. There are a total of 4 sentences about him in this entry. Amazon.com shows his books to be very infrequently purchased. Furthermore, Bilbo's only notability comes from the way he swears and curses at Christians on Usenet, while mocking God and Jesus (see Talk:Mark K. Bilbo#Controversy for more) --Jason Gastrich 03:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Strong delete. Per nom. --Jason Gastrich 03:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

*Delete I know this guy on alt.atheism, it would just break my heart to see his Wiki bio go bye bye. Ruby 03:54, 22 January 2006 (UTC) As much as it pains me, I am changing my vote to Keep because it was nominated in bad faith as retaliation for a series of AfDs against Christian leader bios yesterday. Ruby 04:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep There are obvious WP:POINT issues here but let's try to deal with each article on its own merits. In this case, he has books with well-known publishers. Dlyons493 Talk 04:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Thank you for your suggestion, Dlyons493, but a person making a series of bad-faith nominations may be counting on the good nature of Wikipedians participating in AfD to carry what would otherwise be weak keepers over the top and delete them. It is more important when that happens to stop the process and deal with the disruption rather than carry on business as usual. Ruby 04:36, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
That wasn't meant in any personal way - my vote just happened to follow yours and was responding to the general situation rather than what you said. Your point is a valid one. Dlyons493 Talk 04:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - author of numerous books by reputable publishers. - AdelaMae (talk - contribs) 04:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
You sure about that? I thought Que Pub was a vanity press. --Jason Gastrich 05:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Que does those big fat overpriced computer books. Ruby 05:26, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Regardless, it's certainly not a vanity press, and seeing that from Gastrich is especially entertaining. - WarriorScribe 16:01, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I don't care about his personal opinions, his publishing is notable. Crunch 04:41, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Crunch, AdelaMae. -- Dragonfiend 05:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep, bad faith nomination almost certainly driven by personal animosity for the subject (evidenced by the comments about the "only notability"). Bilbo has a significant publication record from one of the oldest technical publishing houses in the country. Additional notability was explained by me in the debate over Gastrich's previous attempts to vandalize this article - WarriorScribe 05:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. Guettarda 06:05, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Weak Keep On the talk page he says "Okay, this is too weird: Are you folks sure I'm notable enough to have an article?" and his books are lower than Kenneth Eng at Amazon. There's also too much of a systemic bias in favor of every minor computer writer. Still there are enough books listed that he isn't some fly-by-night character it seems.--T. Anthony 07:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
On consideration I realized I can't justify this considering I've voted to delete authors this minor. Taking out of consideration the fact he might show up and be offended his books seem to be pretty minor and he apparently isn't the leader or inventor of anything much except some website. So switch to delete.--T. Anthony 07:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep. Notable publisher, very bad faith nomination. Grandmasterka 10:16, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete I count less than 1k google hits. Am I searching correctly? Perhaps I ought to include the middle name (which I do not know?) I must presume that anyone with this few google hits is not very notable. As for being a published author, WP:BIO makes clear that he needs to have two books with an audience of 5,000 or more. Can anyone cite verifiable (read: non self-reported) figures for book sales on this person? If so, and if these figures meet WP:BIO, I will change my vote to keep. Based on the information currently available, however, I must vote to delete. --Pierremenard 11:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. good handful of books, plus alt.atheism. Bad faith nom. --Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 11:55, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Seriously folks. Regardless of the publisher, the guy wrote a book on 'how to use Macwrite.' Chew on that for a minute. Macwrite (while brilliant for it's time) had around the same feature set that notepad for windows currently has. Noteable publisher maybe, but not so notable work. In addition while it seems possible that the original delete request was in bad faith, some of the keep votes seem to be in just as bad faith but on the opposite side of the fence. Delete it. MueX 12:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
    • I'm sorry, but this doesn't make any sense. Are you arguing that books on obsolete computer software should be deleted? Why? Does that mean presently valid articles will become invalid over time? Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 04:42, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:POINT and Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jason Gastrich Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] AfD? 13:40, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Abstain for the moment. I do question the notability of this one, but the abuse of AFD as a political tool is objectionable. --kingboyk 17:18, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:POINT Jim62sch 18:04, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:44, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. This is an attack nomination, and as the original author of this article, I find it quite insulting. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 19:19, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, meets WP:BIO Tinus 21:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, bad faith nom, WP:POINT. MCB 22:48, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keeep bad faith nom. The borderline notability of the subject (and others nominated by Gastric), however, means this could be considered for deletion from a credible, reputable editor. Eusebeus 23:09, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment Is it necessary to inflame the issue by deliberately altering Jason's last name? Ruby 01:39, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - vindictive attack by Gastrich. Bilbo has written some non-fiction educational books - notable.Blnguyen 23:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep as blatant violation of WP:POINT. Also, the nominator of this article has a currently ongoing RFC and his motives are clearly suspect. Cyde Weys 23:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. Arbustoo 01:37, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. Jason decided to make this us vs. them, and I choose them. --StuffOfInterest 01:38, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - I know Bilbo doesn't want a page. Tough. You're notable. Harvestdancer 02:15, 23 January 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, published author, behavior on Usenet not relevant. Crotalus horridus (TALK • CONTRIBS) 04:43, 23 January 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.