Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Krassenstein

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. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 21:40, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ed Krassenstein[edit]

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

Lacking depth-of-coverage from reliable source. Claims to fame amount to owning a few non-notable web forums and having a few of his tweets mentioned in articles about Donald Trump. The only source that seems to meet the depth part of notability is the Medium (website) article, which as (essentially) a blog host rarely would meet WP:RS criteria. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 04:35, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Patience, Slightly mad 05:16, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 05:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. ...William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 11:11, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. WeAreAllHere _talk 05:36, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. No RS report on anything other than tweets. wumbolo ^^^ 08:43, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note As the creator of this article, I'm really hoping that this article be rescued. I really am. I'm hoping we all work together to fix the article and hopefully to keep it as well. Regarding the tweets Ed posts, it's mentioned in the articles. However, as I said, we can all work together to rescue the article and hopefully keep it. --LovelyGirl7 talk 21:18, 12 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Move to User draft I went to the Teahouse recently and the person who responded to my question suggests this should be moved to User:LovelyGirl7/Draft/Ed Krassenstein. I believe this should be moved to the draft because I am interested in working on it more. If you can move it to User:LovelyGirl7/Draft/Ed Krassenstein and delete Ed Krassenstein I would appreciate it. Than whenever I find reliable sources, it can be moved back to “Ed Krassenstein” again. Thanks —LovelyGirl7 talk 21:12, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If that's the route you're going, please be aware of these policies. Wikipedia:Criteria_for_speedy_deletion#G4._Recreation_of_a_page_that_was_deleted_per_a_deletion_discussion and Wikipedia:Deletion_policy#Undeletion. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:28, 14 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: I've seen the rules. I'm familiar with them. I'm okay with moving it to the draft so I can work on it more. --LovelyGirl7 talk 04:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete While there are a handful of RS they are of the most incidental variety, mentioning the subject in passing. Overall, this fails the GNG. Chetsford (talk) 04:05, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I have no objection to this being userfied to LovelyGirl7's draftspace, but as it stands, this just seems like yet another Internet wannabe blowhard with a threadbare claim to notability. Ravenswing 17:10, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravenswing: Are you calling me a Internet wannabe blowhard or are you calling Ed Krassenstein a Internet wannabe blowhard? --LovelyGirl7 talk 17:42, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm pretty sure Ravenswing is referring to Krassentein. It's hard to understand why anyone would think he was notable. Do you have any personal or professional connections to Krassenstein, per Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#How_to_disclose_a_COI? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 18:21, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm calling him one, obviously; he's the subject of the AfD, after all. I'd be hard pressed to imagine why the comment could be directed to you, so like Ohnoitsjamie, I'm now curious as to whether there's a COI in play. Ravenswing 20:16, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ravenswing: he is one, especially with his anti-Trump tweets and stalking him on each tweet. —LovelyGirl7 talk 20:55, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: Since I’m familiar with the rules, is it okay if I create a new draft and copy what’s in the article into my draft? That way I can work on it and do reliable sources on it. —LovelyGirl7 talk 20:57, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@LovelyGirl7: Can you please address the COI question, specifically, do you have any personal or professional connections to Krassenstein per the aforementioned policy? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:17, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Ohnoitsjamie: I have no connections to Ed or Brian. I don’t have social media or follow them, but I do research them. I’ve heard people tell me these 2 are frauds and that they stalk Trump on Twitter each day. —LovelyGirl7 talk 05:49, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. SarahSV ^(talk) 22:05, 15 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete This article is becoming a target of repeated vandalism. I’ve seen several IPs vandalize the article when it shouldn’t. With that said, I say speedy delete it as “G7: one author who requested deletion”. I can create a new draft (1-2 months from now maybe) of the article, but I’d like to also copy what’s in the new draft (if I create one) so me and some editors can work on this together to finally make it notable this time. I’m familiar with Wikipedia’s deletion policies. With that said, the article can be speedy deleted. —LovelyGirl7 talk 13:58, 16 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The last sentence of this article is completely incorrect and fabricated — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.61.132.169 (talk) 09:53, 18 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note I will admit, the article isn’t notable. With that said, feel free to close speedy delete the article as “one author who requested deletion” or as “A7: doesn’t indicate importance” if you wish. I believe it’s no longer needed and I will admit there’s no reason for a internet Trump stalker like him to have his own article. —LovelyGirl7 talk 15:31, 18 April 2018 (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.