Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skylar Deleon
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 was keep (non-admin closure). Nom withdrawn and article refactored to focus on the murder; this alleviates all concerns of delete !voters. VG ☎ 18:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Skylar Deleon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
If reliable sources only cover the person in the context of a particular event, then a separate biography is unlikely to be warranted. --Elliskev 12:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- KEEP. Individual is notable for a number of reasons. Proxy User (talk) 14:06, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you enumerate them? --Elliskev 14:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not going to argue with you. I've voted to keep. Proxy User (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Afd is not a vote, it's a discussion. --Elliskev 14:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You have no right to tell me what my opinion of an article has to be. Pleas stop acting like a pompous ass. Is this Afd is to be your personal farce? How dare you tell what I can and can not say here as to what my opinion of the value of this article is. Proxy User (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't think anyone is telling you what to think or say, they were just asking questions hoping for a response. Please be civil to other people on Wikipeida. If you don't feel like responding, that's fine. If you do, that's fine too. However, please understand that simply saying "keep" without a reason will have much less weight than saying "keep" with a reason.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I *did* give a reason. The individual is notable. For several obvious reasons. Elliskev disagrees. That's not my problem. Proxy User (talk) 16:54, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't think anyone is telling you what to think or say, they were just asking questions hoping for a response. Please be civil to other people on Wikipeida. If you don't feel like responding, that's fine. If you do, that's fine too. However, please understand that simply saying "keep" without a reason will have much less weight than saying "keep" with a reason.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You have no right to tell me what my opinion of an article has to be. Pleas stop acting like a pompous ass. Is this Afd is to be your personal farce? How dare you tell what I can and can not say here as to what my opinion of the value of this article is. Proxy User (talk) 14:21, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Afd is not a vote, it's a discussion. --Elliskev 14:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm not going to argue with you. I've voted to keep. Proxy User (talk) 14:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Can you enumerate them? --Elliskev 14:07, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep I think that this person has potentially more noteworthy events than just the murder case.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Plethora of sources, WP:BLP1E says Cover the event, not the person. We can of course do so, e.g. by rewriting and moving the article. Not by deleting it, though. Everyme 14:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- The article is significant, I vote that it be kept. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.176.237.64 (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2008 (UTC) — 66.176.237.64 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Look, I agree that it should be kept, but AfD is not a majority vote. All comments should be based on and state their reasoning. Simple votes such as yours will be disregarded by the closing admin. Everyme 14:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: if all murder victims get listed, how many pages will it fill up in the end? Is this a noteworthy murder? Probably not. Can this information be used for reference for future articles on criminality, murder, child actors? Probably not. Is there anything special about this murder? Probably not, as there have been numerous murders documented with as motive stealing. Finally, did the murderer or victims 'do' anything other than this? Not that I can find out. It's not because one lives and breathes on this earth that this is a noteworthy reason for mention in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.78.71.2 (talk) 16:20, 21 October 2008 (UTC) — 194.78.71.2 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Keep. This is the only place I could find to see what this child actor had been a part of. Since he was convicted, it is not a rumer or false hood. Please keep his background info. User from the NW. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.24.119.10 (talk) 15:29, 21 October 2008 (UTC) — 72.24.119.10 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
- Keep: This murder has been getting national press for years. Saruhon (talk) 16:44, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy refactoring to Murder of Thomas and Jackie Hawks began at this point. Uncle G (talk) 15:43, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Withdrawn The page move nullifies my original reason for nomination. Seems to meet crime notability guidelines. --Elliskev 16:50, 21 October 2008 (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.