Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Boden

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. Physchim62 (talk) 12:23, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Roger Boden

Just another bursar (there are thousands of them; they're minor financial functionaries). He had a little run in with Employment law over racial discrimination, and it was settled out of court. A nine-day wonder, if that, hardly noticed outside Keble, much less outside Oxford. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete (just to keep things clear). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 16:00, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

"Mel Etitis"'s statement above does not provide adequate grounds for deletion. This story (and Boden's name) was reported in the national and international press - it is of significance in light of the current UK government's attempts to promote university education for all. Racial discrimination is an important topic and was brought to the fore by Boden's actions. Nobody is suggesting that this is the biggest story in the world, but it is well recognised by thousands of Keble and Oxford alumni. It is belittling, misleading, and offensive to describe Boden's actions as "a little run in" with the law - thereby not warranting publication. I strongly contest the above user's case for deletion. -- 18:45, 5 November 2005

• Do not delete -- 18:45, 5 November 2005
• Delete, 145 unique Google hits, and they are for several different people with the same name, including forum posts by someone with the name. User:Zoe|^(talk) 19:10, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
• Strong delete Its pretty obvious that 84.64.91.128 has an agenda against the nn subject of this article FRS 19:48, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

• Strong do not delete -- This is not the case. It seems that my above defence of the page has been ignored by Users Zoe and FRS. It seems that the would-be censors of the Roger Boden page are current Keble College members or associates of Boden who want to brush this under the carpet. What a pity - and surely not in the spirit of Wikipedia. Boden is significant; I strongly object to the calls for the article's deletion. -- 84.64.91.128 20:21 5th November 2005

Since I haven't been editing here very long, it's possible that the above suggestion of impartiality could be taken seriously. It would be hard to prove the facts that I have never visited Oxford nor heard of Keble College. Fortunately, though, I've already opined on similar matters and expressed a strong view that slams of nn persons or businesses are intolerable and should be AfD'd or SD'd with all haste [1][2]

where an apparently or marginally non-notable subject is being put in a negative light, especially by anonymous editors, we should be quicker to delete b/c few editors will have the interest or knowledge to correct a negative PoV slant. And the subject of the article may unknowingly suffer a lot of damage b/c Google searches return links from WP associating the subject with some alleged wrongdoing. I'm glad to see this article being strongly opposed. If the incident the anon contributor wants to introduce is notable at all, it should be vetted at Keble College, Oxford where, presumably, those who have an interest and knowledge about it will be able to make sure views from both sides are adequately represent--FRS 01:02, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. And I have nothing to do with Keble College, for the record. - Sensor 20:32, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

• Request -- If we take Sensor's claim not to be associated with Keble College in good faith, may we ask what are his/her grounds for the deletion of this article? -- 84.64.91.128 20:43 5th November 2005 (GMT)
  • Sensor wrote to delete "per nom", meaning "per nomination", or in other words, on the same grounds as those stated in the original nomination (see above). This is common phrasing in Articles for Deletion discussion. Please assume good faith on the part of the AfD voters. No vote on my part yet, though. --Metropolitan90 21:15, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
    • To clarify, my vote is delete as non-notable and for the reasons cited by Just zis Guy. - Sensor 22:26, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I work less than ten minutes from Oxford and often read the Oxford Mail (even had letters published in it), I've never even heard of the man. College bursars are ten a penny. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] :: AfD? 22:17, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

• Thank you for the explanation user Sensor. I have been looking into the claim made by user Zoe above. When I type "Roger Boden" in quotation marks into google.co.uk, a good number of results refer to Boden of Keble College. There is no question that there may be other people called Roger Boden, but this is not grounds for deletion. In addition to the Guardian online newspaper column reporting Boden's actions already posted on the disputed article, google.co.uk also shows me an article on a Race Rights website: [3]. The significance of Boden should not be denied or, if I may say, censored. -- 84.64.91.128 22:18 5th November 2005 (GMT)

• Comment: I have to say that as-written it was a Speedy A6 and as NPOVd it is a Speedy A7. I think it should be speedied and be done with it. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] :: AfD? 22:25, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

• Objection: "Just zis Guy, you know?" has already just censored the Roger Boden article by deleting half the contents, and is now requesting to have the article speedied. Although he may never have read about Roger Boden in the Oxford Mail, those of all who are involved with Equal Opportunities up and down the country are very aware of Boden and the associated discrimination case. I am dismayed that in this day and age (and moreover on a forum such as Wikipedia), other users choose to be so dismissive about such events and personnages. A pity indeed. -- 84.64.91.128 22:32 5th November 2005 (GMT)

  Comment: Please, 84.64.91.128, assume good faith on behalf of Wikipedia editors. Editing an article does not equal "censorship", especially inasmuch as Wikipedia is not a governmental entity. In any event, from the research I just did, albeit quickly, it appears that Mr Boden was indeed the plaintiff in a discrimination lawsuit. That, however, does not in and of itself make him notable. Please see Wikipedia's guidelines to notability to understand what is considered "notable". This is not to disparage Mr Boden's plight in any way; however, because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and Wikipedia is not infinite. I hope this gives you a better understanding of the editing process. Thanks for participating, and please feel free to contribute in the future! - Sensor 22:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

  • Response: Good faith is assumed. Unfortunately, I am overcome with a sense of disillusionment. I wish you all luck with your deletions, etc.. -- 84.64.91.128 22:56 5th November 2005 (GMT)
• Delete. Unimportant functionary who does not meet criteria for inclusion of biographies. If 84.64.91.128 believes this is an important event in the history of Keble College, Oxford, or that Keble has a documented history of race discrimination, 84.64.91.128 should add a note on it there, subject of course to Wikipedia's policies of neutrality and citing sources. 84.64.91.128 should do this him- or herself. I am not going to recommend "merge and delete" because due to GFDL requirements this is laborious for the closing sysop. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:57, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Challenge: On the contrary, Roger Boden passes the google.co.uk test, and also fits the criterion of "Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events" -- 84.64.91.128 10:02 6th November 2005 (GMT)

I don't agree with your interpretation. There's no exactly threshold for the "Google test," but I get only 169 hits on exact phrase Robert Boden on google.co.uk returning only "pages from the UK:" [4] Many of them do not seem to be the same Roger Boden who is the the subject of this article. Is "Roger Boden, Oldbury" who took place in the 2003 Mensa games the same person? The genius sound and video production engineer? The Birmingham punk rocker? Searches on "Roger Boden" Keble, "Roger Boden" Cambridge, and "Roger Boden" Bursar get 130-150 hits or so. A completely unrestricted search on "Roger Boden" gives me only 343 hits. None of these are impressive.

As for newsworthiness, a search for "Roger Boden" on Google News returns only a single hit. For comparison, the goings-on of the Dedham, MA Dedham youth basketball program gets four.

I repeat, the incident might possibly belong in the Keble College, Oxford article, but the individual Roger Boden does not need a separate article. Dpbsmith (talk) 16:56, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

• Final post: I disagree with your implied definitions of the words "impressive" and "newsworthiness". I no longer wish to spend my time on this earth defending the legitimacy of the article. Boden is significant - and those who fail to recognise this I can only describe as unfortunate souls. Whoever finally removes the Boden article should take a good hard look at themselves in the mirror and ask the question "Is this the right thing to do?", for I fear that you will have blood on your hands. I will never contribute to Wikipedia again in my life, as - with respect - it seems to be the domain of pedantic beings who lack spirit and vision. I bid you all good night. -- 84.64.91.128 18:19 6th November 2005 (GMT)

I suggest that you lack a sense of proportion. You will note that as "censored" no text was actually deleted. You will note that per Talk:Roger Boden I have told you why it was done. You appear to believe that we are unsympathetic: that is not so. You have been pointed to the rules for inclusion of biographical data. Wikipedia is not a campaigining organ, nor is it an indiscriminate collection of information. WP:V, WP:CITE and WP:NPOV were all violated by the text excised. Fix them and the question of notability per WP:BIO remains. You won't persuade us by walking away. - Just zis Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] :: AfD? 20:23, 6 November 2005 (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.