Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stephan Kinsella

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was delete. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 04:45, 30 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Stephan Kinsella

Stephan Kinsella is a non-notable corporate lawyer who has written some articles and contributed to some e-published legal treatises. This is a slightly edited down version of his autobiography, posted by an administrator at an institute of which he's an adjunct member. He does blog a lot, hence some Google hits. Delete -Willmcw 20:10, Apr 15, 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Vanity. The JPS 21:10, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, not notable, vanity. Megan1967 02:20, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• I don't really give a crap one way or the other, but it is not a vanity page, I am not a "corporate" lawyer, and I still have no idea who was the one who posted the original entry. It was news to me and I still do not know who did it. Nskinsella 17:04, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Strong Speedy Keep, Stephan Kinsella is my personal hero. Unisgned vote by User:157.252.160.135, (8 edits)
  • Don't you just love NPOV? The JPS 19:11, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - non-notable, although I really enjoyed his recent blog about farting in the shower.--Duk 19:30, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) [I think you are referring to this entry. 216.216.209.2 21:05, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)]

• This notion of NPOV is comical. Willmcw clearly has an agenda. When he couldn’t get rid of Kinsella’s article through his claim of copyright violation he nominated it for deletion. Further, there are scores of less notable people with their own articles on Wikipedia. Unisgned comment by User:157.252.160.135
  • Feel free to list these alleged less notable people on vfd. Whatever agenda you claim the nominator has, other wikipedians have voted delete anyway. The only keep vote so far is from you, an anon IP. (cue the socks.) The JPS 21:59, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Take a look at the articles started by Willmcw has started, there are certainly less notable people among them. As to Kinsella's status as being notable, he is certainly considered one of the top authors in his field. The fact is the voters have no knowledge of that particular area. They would probably think Walter Block is similarly non-notable. As to my vote, clearly it was somewhat in jest, and like Kinsella, I don’t care if you delete the article. However, I won’t stand by and let you think there was some sort of legitimate process that took place in its selection for deletion. As to my not being registered, I don't intend to register.
  • That's absolutely fine. Whatever the motivation for nomination, the vfd process is legitimate. The JPS 22:47, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Keep your illusions. This process has no legitimacy at all. You're trying to pass it as "democracy" because there's a "vote" involved. 3 or 4 persons voting in support of their friend when he asks for it is hardly democracy (I'm using "friend" in the sense of "fellow Wikipedian aristocrat"). Wllmcw is clearly calling this vote because he felt offended that his GNU propaganda wasn't shared by the article's subject. Wikipedia is about transmitting knowledge, not forcing everybody to accept the GNU licence. --Franz1984 (forgot my password)
      • ROFLMAO The JPS 09:05, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• I vote for keeping the entry. - mi6a2lm

• I vote to keep this article. - Wolfe

• I vote for keeping this entry. - Daugherty
  • Puppet 2: The Revenge of the Socks The JPS 21:41, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • to JPS, RE: Don't you just love NPOV?
      • Certainly do. Your point? The JPS 21:22, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.