Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Hana

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 keep. Daniel .Bryant 06:57, 23 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ben Hana

This is an article about a homeless person, Ben Hana. I could find articles about homeless people from all over the wrold. On the page he is talked about as if he was spritual medium. He was arreted a last year for drunk driving(what a suprise). He said he was not driving the unregistered Toyota he vandalized but a 'Waka'. When he reported for community service he could not work becuase he was required to wear shoes, which he says he has not done in seven years.

Why is this bum and a criminal on here? Is this what wikpedia has resorted to? Lets take him off for godsake!--MD1954 16:51, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This nomination was incomplete. Fixed now. Yomangani ^talk 14:24, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There seems to be enough reliable sources to validate him, plus he seems to be the New Zealand equivalent of the Shakespeare Lady. Wildthing61476 16:56, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. This is an encyclopedia, not a compendium of agreeable people. hateless 17:21, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep - he is notable within Wellington and maybe slightly wider in NZ, although a tad annoying. --Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 20:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletions. -- Midnighttonight remind to go do uni work! 20:51, 18 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. Being homeless or a criminal does not make him any less important to Wellington. There are plently of articles in WP about criminals. --Roue2 00:54, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Never would have guessed this before reading the article, but Keep. Seems sufficiently notable. -Hit bull, win steak^(Moo!) 14:29, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep - Widely noted within Wellington and sufficiently notable in the wider NZ press. In fact, no reason to consider this AfD has been given: it's not being claimed he doesn't meet WP:BIO, just that the article is about a homeless person and that somehow this lowers Wikipedia. I'll assume good faith, but I find MD1954's reasoning at the top there to be pretty insulting. --Dom 19:59, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Relatively Semi-Adequate Keep. This is not just any homeless person...he's on Wikipedia as an eccentric celebrity, and we have plenty of those that nobody deletes. Also, considering the grammatical and spelling errors you have made, you have not thought out this deletion thoroughly. The reason for deletion is weak.--Dch111 01:03, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, for all reasons posted above. - Axver 07:24, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, if wiki has crim's why not have it. pwapwap 18.36 23 October 2006

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.