Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rodney K Moore
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 per consensus and author's request --Steve (Stephen) talk 06:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rodney K Moore
He does not appear to have actually achieved anything of significance. He has been a member of a lot of political parties, lived in a few places, and learned some languages, but he has not held an office or had a significant role in any major event. And it is written like a vanity article. Ground Zero | t 04:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom, unless references are provided and it is toned into neutral prose. This in itself might reduce the article to nothing. I declined the speedy in case there was something notable in all the effusion. --Steve (Stephen) talk 05:14, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. I skimmed through the whole article and couldn't find a shred of notability. Clarityfiend 08:45, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Whittle down all the bluster and it's just a vanity page. Nick mallory 09:39, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep This page is a work in progress, it takes time and effort to amass references, interviews etc. It's hard especially on a person who deliberately avoids media attention. The few interviews of him, are en français and I am working to find some in English. I believe this article is being singled out for deletion because most of those who wish to delete it are English Canadians, who hold a bias against Quebecers, especially sovereigntists. JonathanBouthillier
- Comment: I nominated this article because I do not believe Mr. Moore to have accomplished enough to merit an article in Wikipedia, and only for that reason. I have indicated that in the nomination. None of the comments posted to date indicate any bias against Quebecers or sovereigntists. There is no basis whatsoever for that accusation. The record shows that I created the articles on two sovereigntist political parties (the Union Populaire and the Parti indépendantiste) when I was using the name User:Kevintoronto. Ground Zero | t 15:29, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete a lot of sound and fury signifying nothing. No sources to prove any notability whatsoever. DarkAudit 15:09, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Even in the article, I don't see anything that would make this person meet WP:BIO. Also, I'm not an English Canadian, and don't understand how a Canadian can be English (unless you mean they emigrated from England), and I don't care enough about Quebec to have a bias against people from there. -FisherQueen (Talk) 15:52, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable, except for the rather bizarre twists and turns in his life. As one who lives in Birmingham, I can understand why he wouldn't stick around here too long. The nicest thing most folks here would say about him would likely be, "He's kindly odd." But I digress. Realkyhick 22:44, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, not notable: 13 unique Ghits, none relevant. I could find nothing in New Scientist 2481. Possible hoax and definite issue with WP:A, as Gsearch would usually turn stuff up in all languages. If there are ANY sources at all, please post these for us to look at, there are sufficient number of French-speakers crawling wikipedia. Ohconfucius 03:31, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete per all above. GreenJoe 04:09, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
I read over the neutrality requirements and came to the conclusion, that perhaps I am not the best person to write this article. After all, I am writting a real scholarly article on him and other notable polyglots for a reputable academic journal on linguistics. Clearly, putting this information on wikipedia is a complete waste of time. I'm not sure that Mr Moore would approve anyway. I have little time or patience to debate vague concepts of "notability" with people who couldn't tell someone the first thing about linguistics. I stand by my previous judgement that this article was selected for deletion due to a bias against sovereigntists by English Canadians. Too bad my own articles and research into individuals like Mr Moore aren't yet published. After this experience I plan on keeping scholarly academic information where it really belongs and it's not on wikipedia. Concordia University faculty admonish students to avoid wikipedia and to use academic journals, because Wikipedia is not that accurate. I was once opposed to this anti-wikipedia bias among faculty. But I am beginning to see that they might have been right. I am erasing this article, since I am the one who wrote it in the first place. JonathanBouthillier
- Comment After you write the article, there will be at least one RS; since you will undoubtedly cite other references, they too will be usable. If you like wikis, there's Citizendium, which has a strong group of linguists. DGG 06:30, 29 May 2007 (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.
