Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sholom Keller

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. I counted Zoe, Quentin, D Monack, Renata3, HackJandy and Peyna arguing for deletion and Michan, RoySmith and Zordrac arguing against, which makes it pure numerically a borderline case. Proceeding to look at the arguments. I note that Zoe's nomination is very weak and Michan created the article as her/his first contribution. RoySmith almost convinced me to keep it, but in the end, the lack of credible references was fatal. If there had been a references to a national newspaper or magazine or something like that, I would have kept it, but blogs just don't cut it, I'm afraid. – Jitse Niesen (talk) 01:51, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Sholom Keller

ATTENTION! If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes. Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}

nn "agitator and theoretician" User:Zoe|^(talk) 06:22, 26 November 2005 (UTC)

• No. While not a celebrity this man is a participant of both a hugely important current event as well as a pathblazer in Iraq veteran military resistance. Imagine saying in the 70's that John Kerry (then only a member of Vietnam Veterans Against War) was unimportant. --Michan 07:01, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• I agree with the above poster, this article should not be deleted. --65.96.10.143, 2005-11-26
• Delete, just some random non-notable bugger. Also can IP's even vote? Quentin Pierce 06:49, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
  • THey can vote (it's acutally "discuss") but the closing admin can discount them. User:Zoe|^(talk) 07:03, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
    • And probably will discount them as Meatpuppets. Peyna 00:59, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy A7. NSLE _{(讨论+extra)} 08:30, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - completely lacking in unbiased source material. --דוד ♣ D Monack 10:47, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• Weak delete - just because the article looks pretty neat Renata3 22:15, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. A cursory google search comes up with plenty of references, so this guy clearly exists and most of the basic information in the article appears verifiable. Controversal? Yes. Biased? Yes. POV? Yes. But that just means the article needs work, not that it should be deleted. --RoySmith 23:34, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• Don't Delete. He's a locally well known veteran standing up for a cause he believes in. He's been on the news and has hundreds of google search results. The bandwidth/serverspace taken up by this guy is minimal and is defenitely worth the information. Anyways, this article looks like it has potentially. Also, the quote section is pretty funny. --FluteyFlakes88 23:49, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
  • User's only edit. User:Zoe|^(talk) 00:07, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Actually I've worked on quite a few pages before but never bothered to use a username until now. I was prompted to register one becuase of your comment above about how ip's can't vote. For a two paragraph article you seem to care quite a bit that this gets deleted. --24.60.246.181 02:11, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Just done some research and I think Zoe has a personal bias against this article. Seeing as this guy is anti-war and a self proclaimed anarchist, and Zoe declared that Stalin, Pol Pot, and Mussolini are "heroes"... Decide for yourself though what his motivations are. --24.60.246.181 02:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
      • Your "research" is highly flawed. I never said any such thing. I said that some people consider them heroes. My motive has solely to do with the lack of notability of this person, whose views I personally support. User:Zoe|^(talk) 03:08, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
      • If that's really the case then fair enough. --24.60.246.181 03:14, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - blogger with fairly weak Google hits. Also the sock puppet voting isn't helping my opinion either. HackJandy 07:05, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - has interviews, is notable (P.S. I changed the 3 above "don't deletes" and "no" votes to "keep" to aid in counting). Its important for the sake of balance to include people like this. So that the encyclopaedia overall conforms with WP:POV. Zordrac 12:54, 1 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - no more notable than any other rank-and-file member of those organizations. Peyna 00:39, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Passes the Google test. His name is often mispelled by the media as "Shalom Keller" Could use a whole lot of editing though; there's definitely a lefty bias here. And I'm not so sure that anarchist organizations even have a "rank-and-file". 65.96.220.2 01:09, 3 December 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.