Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ellen Johnson

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 of the debate was Keep. Bad faith nom.--a.n.o.n.y.m t 19:43, 25 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ellen Johnson[edit]

Besides being the leader of an organization, which, in and of itself doesn't make someone notable, she isn't notable at all. --Jason Gastrich 04:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong delete. Per nom. --Jason Gastrich 04:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak delete If original editor wishes to expand the article to show notability then keep it, else delete. TheRingess 04:25, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Article expanded to show mainstream press appearances and TV appearances. Arbustoo 04:14, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. President of a very notable organization. Article is still a stub, but that's no reason to delete. Crunch 04:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep I refuse to let a user with a POV and a grudge disrupt WP to make a point. Ruby 04:27, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep (not a speedy); WP:POINT nomination of a perfectly notable person --keepsleeping quit your job! slack off! 04:29, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep article on notable leader of notable organization; needs expansion not deletion. Ellen Johnson has been a source or topic for The New York Times, Good Morning America, Los Angeles Times, CNN LARRY KING LIVE, The Washington Post, etc. -- Dragonfiend 04:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep There are obvious WP:POINT issues here but let's try to deal with each article on its own merits. In this case, President of a reasonably well-known organisation. Dlyons493 Talk 05:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. Guettarda 06:06, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The organization is notable as is she. People wanting to know what happened to it after Madalyn Murray O'Hair died might be curious of it.--T. Anthony 06:08, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Yet another bad faith nomination/WP:POINT violation from Gastrich. Guettarda 06:13, 22 January 2006 (UTC) duplicate --kingboyk 16:58, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep Gastrich is apparently just working through the atheist category, nominating every article in some sort of "retaliation." Mark K. Bilbo 06:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep as comment just above. --Bduke 11:28, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - I don't see whats notable about her. What has she done to deserve a wikipedia article? Are we going to have an article on every president of a notable organization, even if the person has done nothing notable? --Pierremenard 12:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC) Changing my vote to Keep per T. Anthony's comment below. --Pierremenard 23:25, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
She gets about 50,000 hits.[1] And that's in quotes plus subtracting Liberia.(The president of Liberia being named Ellen Johnson Sirle(i)(a)f) She isn't as public as the previous head, but she's been in national news I believe. There was some march they did[2] and the Political Action Committee--T. Anthony 14:10, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
50,000 Google hits is nothing in the context of a worldwide movement like atheism. I just might accept this as indicative of notability in relatively small contexts/movements/etc.
Well, you know, if you take too "broad" a view of things, what's the point of the Wiki itself? Humans are just a minor species on a trivial planet in a galaxy of billions. In terms of the US American atheist "movement" (so far as the term applies) Johnson is the president of one of the more (if not most) known organizations American Atheists, Inc. Which derives most of its notability from being the organization founded by O'Hair in the wake of the (in)famous prayer in schools suit. Johnson is the first president of the organization after the disappearance and death of O'Hair. She's also the president that got the organization through the period of confusion when O'Hair disappeared. She also appears on national talk shows, is quoted by national publications, and AA, Inc. has lobbiest in D.C. She may not warrant a big bio at this point but I can't see deleting her entirely. Mark K. Bilbo 17:15, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Relax! I find it very easy to see why this article should stay, or that it should never have been AfD'd in the first place. Especially not to make a point. But sometimes wikipedians need to convince not by stating what they know to to be true, but by showing why it is true. Cite external sources, etc. - and then 50,000 Google hits (or 30,000, or 25,000) are not going to cut it. Or shouldn't be. AvB ÷ talk 20:07, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Relax? Oh no, I'm not upset or worked up or anything like that. Just commenting on the issue of notability. I'm actually agreeing with you in a sense (the comment of "notability in a smaller context" that is). She's notable in a local context (US American atheists and organizations) even if that's a "drop in a bucket" from a broader, worldwide point of view. I'm not married to AA, Inc. I'm not even a member. Mark K. Bilbo 20:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
And now that I think about it, I could see a merge with an article on AA, Inc. Maybe it's too soon for her to have a separate article? I'm not sure really. Mark K. Bilbo 20:46, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's difficult to say. It may even be the other way around - notable now, no longer notable when she steps down. Time will tell. I'm in favor of a separate article now because I have the feeling (due to what is basically my own definition of notability) that many users will start a WP search with Ellen's name as the entry point. It would be nice to have some sort of feedback system regarding actual use. AvB ÷ talk 21:30, 24 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS Like I wrote elsewhere, mm: Actually, anyone with some knowledge of atheism and eyes in his head (or fingers on his hand) can see that Ellen Johnson is notable, both positively and negatively, to millions of people. OK, where notability is disputed, references can clinch it, but really, in this case it's like trying to prove apples taste good (218 Google hits). AvB ÷ talk 16:56, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
A few more complete references: -- Dragonfiend 18:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • HEAVEN; DOES IT EXIST?, ABC News Transcripts, SHOW: Good Morning America 8:06 AM EST ABC, December 19, 2005
      • Dear God: Dee-Fense!, The New York Times, December 11, 2005 Sunday, Late Edition - Final, Section 14NJ; Column 2; New Jersey Weekly Desk; Pg. 6
      • The Nation; COLUMN ONE; A Time of Doubt for Atheists ; With the religious making inroads in popular culture and politics, nonbelievers yearn for higher power in Washington., Los Angeles Times, July 18, 2005 Monday, Home Edition, MAIN NEWS; National Desk; Part A; Pg. 1
      • Atheists reach out in S.F.; Conclave designed to turn nonbelievers into activists, The San Francisco Chronicle, MAY 20, 2005, FRIDAY,, FINAL EDITION, NEWS;, Pg. A1,
      • Encore Presentation: What Happens After We Die?, CNN, SHOW: CNN LARRY KING LIVE 9:00 PM EST, April 24, 2005
      • True Non-Believers; In California, One Convention So Over God, The Washington Post, April 12, 2004 Monday, Final Edition, Style; C01,
  • Keep, notable --kingboyk 16:59, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, clearly notable Jim62sch 17:38, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment, As a subscriber to the NYT, I get archive access. NYT has written 9 articles on Ms. Johnson since 1997. By the same token, both Thomas Ice and Jason Gastrich have had zero articles written about them in the NYT. Jim62sch 17:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
True (completely forgotten I have access too). May well say more about the NYT than about the people you've mentioned though - and, as far as I can tell from the other Keep voters' comments, Ellen Johnson has written zero books, which is not a reason to delete her article. AvB ÷ talk 20:49, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Could someone post the titles and dates of those articles on the page? 207.200.116.139 05:47, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This link brings up a list. AvB ÷ talk 18:55, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Only religious bigots want this article deleted. - Darwinek 18:11, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per above. Latinus 18:34, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep --NaconKantari (話)|(郵便) 18:47, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep to stop point making. We do not delete articles because the nominator dislikes the views on religion of the article's subject. --Rob 22:02, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, bad faith nom, WP:POINT. After 10 or more of these it is time to block nominator for disruption of Wikipedia. MCB 22:53, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep vindictive nom by Gastrich of a notable person.Blnguyen 23:30, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep as blatant violation of WP:POINT. Also, the nominator of this article has a currently ongoing RFC and his motives are clearly suspect. Cyde Weys 23:43, 22 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Jason decided to make this us vs. them, and I choose them. --StuffOfInterest 00:51, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep. President of well-known organization and world known author. Also lots of contact with JREF and CSICOP. Arbustoo 01:28, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Are you sure about her being an author? Only two (I think) Amazon.com hits (both e-reprints of short articles from the magazine)].AvB ÷ talk 19:11, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep WP:POINT, disrupting Wikipedia. See Jason Gastrich's RFC, which I am seriously considering escalating to AN/I. Stifle 16:35, 23 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. —Quarl (talk) 2006-01-24 06:02Z
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Ellen_Johnson&oldid=1137824517"