Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Michael A. Moon (2nd nomination)

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. I would normally have closed this as no consensus, but the deciding factor is the fact that the subject of the article has made a reasonable request for the article's deletion. With there being no clear-cut consensus to keep, I am closing this as a deletion -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 08:31, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michael A. Moon[edit]

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

Deletion requested by article subject at OTRS:5248120, essentially on WP:BLP1E grounds and undue weight. I have no opinion. Stifle (talk) 13:38, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:45, 5 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:06, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete if the subject has made a reasonable request to delete the article, I see no reason that request should not be honoured. As Jimbo rather famously said once, "Wikipedia is not here to make people sad". Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 13:56, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep By virtue of participating in multiple high-profile terrorism cases (thus garnering attention from independent sources), the subject has made himself notable. If his high-profile advocacy was limited to one case only, it would be acceptable to merge this with the case article, but he's been in several. Our responsibility to provide information about a public figure (particularly one who has become one volitionally, and not accidentally) trumps the subject's request that he be removed. The Rhymesmith (talk) 00:18, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment High-profile advocacy public figure? I would agree with you if that would be true but than we should be able to find a biography or at least articles about him. Is there any article or biography about him? The cases he has worked on are notable and we have articles and sources he is part of these stories. I think we should at least find a biography or some articles about Michael A. Moon himself before declaring it a major loss not to provide an biography about him. IQinn (talk) 00:42, 13 August 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.