| Revision as of 16:16, 24 February 2006 editFriday (talk | contribs)19,776 editsm Reverted edits by Steven Taylor (talk) to last version by Friday← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:20, 24 February 2006 edit undoSteven Taylor (talk | contribs)65 edits STOP STOP STOP THIS RIDICULOUS DAMNED CENSORSHIP ALRADYNext edit → | ||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate metadata vfd" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page. '' | |||
| <!-- | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links in order to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result of the debate was '''speedily kept'''. This was contested apparently, but it's very obviously the right thing to do. ] ] 16:04, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| Non notable, not worthy of an encyclopedia entry. We can't possibly catalog every crackpot theorist and give them a platform for their asinine, out-of-touch "theories" | Non notable, not worthy of an encyclopedia entry. We can't possibly catalog every crackpot theorist and give them a platform for their asinine, out-of-touch "theories" | ||
| Line 11: | Line 5: | ||
| :''' Speedy Keep''' As much as I may disagree with some of the what the person may have to say, he is notable and I cannot stand with you on this. Misplaced Pages is for NPOV articles, not a soapbox for a viewpoint no matter how worthy.] 15:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | :''' Speedy Keep''' As much as I may disagree with some of the what the person may have to say, he is notable and I cannot stand with you on this. Misplaced Pages is for NPOV articles, not a soapbox for a viewpoint no matter how worthy.] 15:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :'''Keep'''. I see no reason why this guy is not notable enough. After all, he seems to have a New York Times bestseller. Also, it doesn't look like the article especially propagates his theories. – ] 16:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | :'''Keep'''. I see no reason why this guy is not notable enough. After all, he seems to have a New York Times bestseller. Also, it doesn't look like the article especially propagates his theories. – ] 16:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC) | ||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.</div> | |||
Revision as of 16:20, 24 February 2006
Steven_Levitt
Non notable, not worthy of an encyclopedia entry. We can't possibly catalog every crackpot theorist and give them a platform for their asinine, out-of-touch "theories"
- Speedy Keep. This afd sounds like a POV issue. Levitt clearly meets requirements of notability for an author. -Jcbarr 15:24, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep per Jcbarr. --D-Day 15:33, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep As much as I may disagree with some of the what the person may have to say, he is notable and I cannot stand with you on this. Misplaced Pages is for NPOV articles, not a soapbox for a viewpoint no matter how worthy.Coffeeboy 15:41, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. I see no reason why this guy is not notable enough. After all, he seems to have a New York Times bestseller. Also, it doesn't look like the article especially propagates his theories. – Krun 16:01, 24 February 2006 (UTC)