Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Haywood

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. Rough consensus indicates that the article does not meet WP:BLP1E. –MuZemike 23:58, 25 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Kenneth Haywood[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

One event notability or similar one issue notability, content is resulting in an attack article on a living person. Off2riorob (talk) 15:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLP1E: "If reliable sources cover the person only in the context of a single event, and if that person otherwise remains, or is likely to remain, a low-profile individual, we should generally avoid having an article on them." There are reliable sources underlying the article, but they all discuss him only in the context of his secondary connection to a news event. Accordingly, he does not clear the hurdle of notability. Couple that with some tone issues, and the article is unfit for an encyclopedia. —C.Fred (talk) 15:20, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI. Although I have nominated the BLP I have since then removed some content that I consider to be the worst of the violations. Off2riorob (talk) 16:33, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

For editors wishing to see the pre-deletion text, here is the revision immediately prior to AfD nomination and aforementioned edits by Off2riorob. —C.Fred (talk) 20:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, and I am struggling mightily to WP:AGF about this AfD nomination: one can more convincingly assert that WP:BLP1E applies when one has deleted material in a way that leaves only 1E in the article. In its earlier incarnation, the article makes it clear that there is more to his claim for notability than one now sees there. Whether it's enough for WP:GNG is of course still a matter of judgement, but again there might be more to this one than meets the eye at first glance. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:00, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a complaint against me please report it at the correct location. I will not replace the content I have removed, I mentioned it for editors information as what I removed was imo according to policy , in need of removal. If User Nomoskedasticity wants to take responsibility for the content, please feel free to replace it. I also request that you do not disrupt this AFD with what has all the appearance of WP:STALKING my edits after a separate uninvolved discussion. Off2riorob (talk) 20:07, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I came here via WP:BLPN. I'm confident my thoughts will be considered on their merits, nothing more. Nomoskedasticity (talk) 20:35, 18 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - subject looks notable and material appears to be reliably sourced. Yworo (talk) 01:39, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Merge what little substantial content is included to an article on the attack. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:08, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a primarily negative BLP. Sourced or not, he's portrayed as a criminal ("escape"), but has not been convicted of any crime. He's clearly not notable as a criminal, evangelist, or executive coach. He's just a regular guy who came under scrutiny due to his own bad luck and seems to fail WP:WIALPI. Jclemens (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per Jclemens. -- Radagast 3 (talk) 08:04, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Classic BLP1E, getting your wireless router hijacked does not make you notable. His 'controversies' as a pastor that are now removed were not reliably sourced. By the way, there seems to be a vendetta against this guy judging from commons:Category:Kenneth Haywood Fences&Windows 16:12, 21 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:BLP1E as made by Off2riorob Codf1977 (talk) 10:02, 25 June 2010 (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.