Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Aravosis

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.

Theresult was Keep --JForget 02:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

John Aravosis[edit]

Strictly procedural nomination. This was speedied by User:Danny in October, with the edit summary "completely unsourced collection of allegations", but there's no record of any discussion (no prior AFD, no talk page discussion after May of 2007, etc.) as to what his or other people's concerns may have been. While it does require some reference improvements, I'm having trouble finding anything in this article that would violate WP:BLP, and the subject himself is unquestionably notable enough for an article. Deletion was clearly out of process as this doesn't meet any speedy criterion. No vote from me, but I would like to know if other people see problems here that I don't. Bearcat (talk) 23:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sexuality and gender-related deletions. —Bearcat (talk) 23:13, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: There are certainly many unsourced statements that require attribution or deletion, but that is no reason for AfD. RGTraynor 23:22, 7 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Needs more sources but the basic facts are there. Perhaps the concern was what the article says about the targets of his activism, as that's where several of the {{citation needed}} templates are. As it is, the article is long on an activism resume and short on Americablog, which is what he's best known for, making it read somewhat punchily. --Dhartung | Talk 00:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- Needs cleanup, but that is not grounds for AFD Manning (talk) 12:50, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not claiming that it is — it's just good practice, when restoring an article that another admin previously speedied out of process, to submit it to AFD as a procedural matter. Bearcat (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep -- SatyrTN (talk | contribs) 14:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Manning. Some WP:RS are in the external links section. He's clearly notable. Bearian'sBooties (talk) 03:41, 9 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep well-known and respected US LGBT activist, his campaign against Dr Laura led to other high-profile actions as well. Benjiboi 12:37, 9 December 2007 (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.