Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Weber

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 was delete. Singularity 18:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Mark Weber

Mark Weber (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

He's director of an Institute on Holocaust denial, but there's nothing here to suggest the individual is worthy of an encyclopedia bio. Docg 17:01, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete - References only suggest they support that the term "holocaust denial" exists or applies to Weber, and since none are linked, cannot confirm or deny that. Though going by the titles, none mention Weber. Thus fails WP:BIO. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:51, 21 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Weber is a well-known Holocaust denier. He, and the Institute for Holocaust Denial are cited heavily in Why People Believe Weird Things (e.g. pp. 191-194) by Michael Shermer, ISBN 9780285638037. To quote Shermer's opening statement in his section on Weber: "With the possible exception of David Irving, in the denier movement Mark Weber may know the most about history and histiriography." (p. 193). Blackmetalbaz (talk) 13:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Plenty of reliable sources found by Google News and Google Books show that he is a notable holocaust denier. Phil Bridger (talk) 23:34, 22 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as redundant: First, what kind of WP:COATRACK footnote is that?! And it, along with most of the article, is completely redundant with Institute for Historical Review. There is nothing independently notable except for the Ghana connection. I see that Aboutmovies noticed there were currently zero WP:RS about the subject himself. I'll watchlist this just to see if those RS show up. John J. Bulten (talk) 19:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
They didn't. John J. Bulten (talk) 16:59, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Lack of credible independent sources; nothing much but self-published material and attacks, neither of which is a great deal of use. Does not seem actually to be notable outside the context of the institute. Guy (Help!) 14:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom, Guy. Eusebeus (talk) 18:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete As per Jzg. Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:38, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment. Could any of the last three editors please explain how the books and articles which I linked to in my last update are "nothing much but self-published material and attacks"? And if he "does not seem actually to be notable outside the context of the institute" then why don't those books and articles even mention the institute? Phil Bridger (talk) 09:32, 29 March 2008 (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.