Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric L. Haney

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. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 22:00, 30 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eric L. Haney[edit]

article created by User:Striver as a part of his campaign of soapboxing his conspiracy non-sense.

delete as strivercruft --Striver 23:25, 25 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Confused. This is exceedingly bizarre. Did you create this page with an AfD notice on it, and then vote to delete the page you created? I am sure I'm missing something here. --Deville (Talk) 01:05, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I completed this AFD since it didn't get linked here, but I'm quite puzzled by it! Esquizombi 00:31, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Amazon lists his book [1] at #1278, which would seem fairly notable. Fan1967 00:39, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think he's trying to use reverse-psychology, and it's working. Weak Keep per Amazon ranking. Eivind ^t ^@^c 01:24, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep I'm a fan of his show, actually, but I think the amazon link is a better account of notability. I suspect JD hacked into Striver's account ;-) --Mmx1 02:21, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into The Unit unless expanded to talk about him more. kotepho 02:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Georgewilliamherbert does good work. kotepho 04:47, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep as WP:POINT nom by Striver. Esquizombi 15:23, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, Striver breaking with WP:POINT.--Jersey Devil 17:49, 26 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - besides being a noteable author, he also helped to found the modern-day Delta Force unit. Noteworthy in my book! —akghetto ^talk 09:00, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - Seems notable, but equally confused as to why User:Striver created the article with an AfD tag, then voted to delete. Concerned perhaps he is trying to make a point regarding WP's tolerance for certain articles??? --mtz206 14:27, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - User:Striver left the following note on my talk page which is relevant to this AfD --mtz206 15:24, 27 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I plan to expand the article, but i know it will be afd if i do that, so i afd'd it without the controversial stuff, so people can consentrate on the guys notability, and after that, when it is established that he is not non-notable, then i can expand on him. Maybe not the best thing to do, i got a bit angry at geting perfectly notable articles deleted only since people cant tolerate views they dont share, even thogh they fullfill the Wikipedia criteria. For a recent example, just see my Sheen-Alex article, it fullfills all wikipedia criteria for inclusion, but its geting deleted.--Striver 15:13, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

*Delete not notable. No vote either way. Striver again defies logic with this bizarre action and it is a violation of WP:POINT...don't disrupt Wikipedia to make a point, Striver.--MONGO 04:47, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Now everyone can see why i get frustrated, the guy just votes procedural deleted on anyting, whitout even bothering to chek the facts. And he is not the only one. --Striver 12:58, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This is clearly a WP:POINT violation, but Haney is clearly notable as well. Shame on you, Striver. And you too, Mongo, for not doing your homework. Georgewilliamherbert 05:07, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I have added a {{cleanup}} tag and considerable content in the last few hours. This is no longer a stub article. Georgewilliamherbert 08:50, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree with both admonitions by Georgewilliamherbert, although Striver's transgression is much more serious than MONGO's. As for the merits: I don't know whether Haney's role in the founding and operation of Delta Force was extensive enough to make him notable on that basis; is he an American Otto Skorzeny? In any event, he's the author of a serious nonfiction book, one that has a high Amazon rank, has already been translated into at least two other languages, and has reached many more people through its transformation into a TV series. JamesMLane t c 07:59, 28 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Bizarro use of WP:POINT -- Samir (the scope) 04:40, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Closing comment: Striver, this has been a magnificent waste of time. See my comment in your talk page. --Pablo D. Flores (Talk) 22:00, 30 March 2006 (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.