Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Annesley Abercorn (2nd nomination)

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 was delete. BJ^Talk 00:00, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Annesley Abercorn

Non-notable PPC, fails WP:POLITICIAN. Being chairman of the Bow Group would also appear not to be sufficient grounds for notability; cf. Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Bristow (chairman of Conservative Future, but I suggest that the two organizations are comparable). Being a parliamentary advisor is likewise non-notable, as per the article's previous (successful) nomination. Wereon (talk) 15:59, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

DELETE - as per above - non-notable person. Also, if you look at the history of the article, you find that it started as a vanity piece by the subject, was edited down to a stub for non-verifiability, and what little remains keeps being edited by the subject, to remove embarrassing details like his real birth name.

Politico234 (talk) 22:24, 25 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

POLITICO 234 CANNOT BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. LOOK AT PREVIOUS EDITS MADE MY POLITICO 234 BELOW. HE IS SIMPLY OUT TO SLANDER THE SUBJECT OF THIS ARTICLE http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Annesley_Abercorn&diff=224196299&oldid=221239087 (midget tossing) Politico234> http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Annesley_Abercorn&diff=224196299&oldid=218427215 (masturbation) Politico234 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Carpetmonster (talk • contribs) 19:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's irrelevant, and doesn't invalidate Politico234's present claims.

Carpetmonster, to avoid conflicts of interest, would you mind telling us please what exactly your relationship with Mr. Abercorn is? I note that you've at least got close enough to photograph him, and provided many of the biographical details. Are you working on behalf of the HGCA? Wereon (talk) 02:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weron, would you mind telling us please what exactly your relationship with Mr Abercorn is? And who Politico234 is? And what exactly Politico 234's relationship with Mr Abercorn is!? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.156.129 (talk) 12:14, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, Politico234 has no relationship whatsoever to Mr Abercorn - they've never even met. He is merely an interested third-party observer of British politics. He does, however, respectfuly request that Mr Abercorn cease making legal threats such as his accusations of slander, as per http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:No_legal_threats , whether he is using his 'Carpetmonster' pseudonym, or a traceable IP addresses like 86.143.156.129. Incidentally, for the record, any hypothetical written defamation is libel, not slander. Ignorance of such a collosally important point - particulrly in one who is standing for election to be a lawmaker - does not tend to lend much seriousness to such accusations.

As for the edits Mr Abercorn has so kindly highlighted, I stand by my defence at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Politico234 - as I said there, when I was new to wikipedia I regarded the original article written by him at http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Annesley_Abercorn&oldid=194193605 to be so patently ludicrous, laughable, and self-serving that I thought it merited satire - and so I added a few contributions in a spoof vein. I have since accepted that this was contrary to wikipedia's rules, and since being made aware of this, you will see from my edit history that I have only made factual changes which have either had verifiable sources, or else removed large chunks of far-from-NPOV and/or unsourced material. This is in marked contrast to Mr Abercorn's ongoing, periodic, self-serving edits.

Politico234 (talk) 12:44, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ugh, this is getting ugly. I asked Carpetmonster about his relationship with Abercorn because the message he left above was practically identical to one left on, and subsequently deleted from, the talk page to this nomination, made by User:86.143.156.129 - the anonymous user above - leading me to conclude they are one and the same. The IP address is one of the handful which has been vandalizing the article by removing Abercorn's birthname, leading me to suspect that Carpetmonster is either the subject of the article or someone closely associated with him. Plus, there's the whole thing, as I said, of owning posed photographs of the subject, which does suggest an association.

For the record, though, I will state that I have no connexion whatsoever (to the best of my knowledge) with Abercorn, Carpetmonster, Politico234, Hazel Grove, Andrew Stunell, the Bow Group... — Wereon (talk) 23:59, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:05, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep though I regret already stepping into the Bizarroworld of this AfD. For the record, I am the son-in-law of Wereon and a former candidate for the Loonie Party, before the Bow Group paid an alien to take over my body. This guy Abercorn, apparently, is notable--though not as a politician, really, but as a clown. Here's the Daily Mail online: "...a terrific, eye-bulging belter called Annesley Abercorn. Despite the aristocratic surname Mr Peppercorn, or whatever, proved to be an Asian lad with a flair for histrionics. "Waste! Waste! Waste!" he shouted..." Anyway, there's plenty of coverage on Google News. Drmies (talk) 01:26, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi son. It's worth pointing out that nearly all of the articles about Abercorn you found are about his performance at the 2004 Conservative party conference. I can't see how that makes him notable, especially as Wikipedia does not even consider the party conferences themselves notable. Wereon (talk) 12:49, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

See, that's why I'm getting a divorce. Yeah, alright, you're right--though there is that one thing about the name change, which, in my opinion, moves the whole subject past the "one event" kind of thing. How about I say weak keep, and I promise I won't shed tears over deletion (one without salt, of course). Now, if we keep, than we can verifiably refer to someone as an eye-bulging hysteric...surely there is a beauty in there... BTW, will you ask your daughter to come back home one of these days? Drmies (talk) 19:35, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:POLITICIAN. لenna vecia 04:08, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, agree with nom and Jennavecia (talk · contribs) that this fails WP:POLITICIAN. Cirt (talk) 12:41, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.