Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Anne Frank's cats
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
For some reason, this AfD seems to have become a personal duel between Neuropean (talk · contribs) and Robertsteadman (talk · contribs). --Ragib 20:28, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
[edit] comments
Comment:' - oh good personla attacks - always the sign of someone who has lost the argument. Robertsteadman 17:29, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- These things happen when users get upset. I don't fully understand the situation, but it seems complex, so I'm not sure calling it "clear hypocricy" is a good idea. It might escalate what appears to be a delicate situation. No offense, I'm sure it does seem like clear hypocricy to you. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 00:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Understandable, and no offense taken. I am confident in my assessment, and can easily back it up. Honestly, I am not sure if this nomination is a result of other issues, so I am not even certain if this is a bad faith nom or not. Given that I do not believe the nominator was involved with the previous debate, I will assume good faith unless an admin does show this to be a case of sockpuppetry. As such, I believe the expanded article stands on its own merits and should be kept regardless of the politics of users. Resolute 00:56, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
The nominator was involved in both this and one of his other sock names on the Ruth Kelly article disputes - that is why the nomiatiopn id bad faith. Then there are seve4ral contributors who have supported in bad faith because of the Thunder Bay Northern Hawks dispute. This is truly pathetic. Robertsteadman 17:31, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
-
- Mediation (Committee or Cabal) would not result in a keep or delete (mediators aren't necessarily admins), it would merely try to help the involved parties come to a point of mutal understanding, and maybe even consensus. There could still be an AfD. I am merely afraid that holding the AfD at this time may increase tension in what seems to be a deeper problem going beyond this one article. However, I thank you for being able to assume good faith on the part of all parties, which reduces the chance of the AfD increasing tension. : ) Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 01:09, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
-
-
[edit] Vanity
This is a perfect of example why editors should be discouraged from having lists of 'articles created' on their user pages. Some editors are unable to stand by and see their articles deleted or, sometimes, even edited by others. This smacks of keeping score. NPOV & AGF all seem to be in short supply in this debate.Neuropean 18:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- Well it's tricky to AGF when you're dealing, largely, with a sockpuppet who previously tried to get this removed, then within 10 minutyes changed his mind, whose contributions show someone out to make a point and who is not really being a constructive member of the WP comunity. When you start behaving like a genuine editor interested in working on the encyclopedia and only using one of your user accxounts then I might AGF. Robertsteadman 09:54, 30 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Why Is Anne Frank Famous?
Anne Frank is famous not because of anything that she did but because of her fate. If she had not been killed, her diary might never have been published at all. I'm not trying to diminish her notability, she represents many ideas that we need to remember. I just don't think that we need articles on everything about her - if anything trivia like this diminishes her memory. If we need to know about her love of cats a simple Anne loved cats and frequently wrote about them. Her fprced sparation from her own cat Moortje made her time in the attic even more unbearable.Neuropean 12:58, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- She is famous for her fate, agreed but she is also famous for her story and for her writings (not just the diary). Her diary is the second best selling book OF ALL TIME (after the Bible) and exists in many, many translations and editions. In Western Europe most schoolchildren study her at least once during their school life. She has been the subject of Oscar winning documentaries and Holywood feature films, many television programmes and books by those who knew her. To properly provide the information about the other named characters (human and animal) in her diary is a proper and encyclopedic way to approach her book....... Robertsteadman 13:04, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
And it's not just cat - it's about all the cats - as has been said by those close to the Frank family - they were a very cat family.Robertsteadman 13:10, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
