Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Simon Mol

Add links
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 delete. --Coredesat 06:45, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Simon Mol[edit]

Simon Mol (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Contested prod. Biography of a writer whose sole claim to fame seems to be a suspect autobiography and a recent arrest for infecting nearly 20 women with HIV Sethacus 21:17, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Simon Mol has another claim to fame. He was granted the prestigious award "Anti-Fascist of the Year" in 2003, and was a long time human rights activist specializing in anti-racism. Graham Wellington
Question - is the award really prestigious? I can find only two references to it on google. Bigdaddy1981 03:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as nominator and prodder, per WP:NOTE, as well as WP:NOT#NEWS. Serious BLP issues as well. Take those out you have nothing to substantiate an article. Prod was removed by anon, reason being that the subject is mentioned in several Polish publications,possibly due to the HIV story. No reliable sources have popped up, as of yet.--Sethacus 21:26, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete If what the one source we can read in English says is true Mr. Mol is a very evil person. However, even so as a person whose only claim to fame is being arrested (and not yet tried) he is not notable for a WP article. I also find the source a bit suspect since it seems to have a racist agenda. Steve Dufour 02:08, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete non-notable dirtbag. Bigdaddy1981 04:09, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. This article has been around for eight months and this is the first time it has been AfD. During that time, several Wikipedians (at least 15 different people) have made improvements to the article. In accordance with WP:GOODFAITH and acknowledging the community's efforts, I think we should keep the article. Truthanado 23:42, 19 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No one has done anything substantial to this article in over two months, and the last was the article's creator. As far as AGF, I and others have assumed that every good faith effort has been made to justify this article's existence. And, looking, even the Polish Wiki has verifiability problems with their version.--Sethacus 02:30, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lack of activity can be an indication of an article's stability; it has nothing to do with notability. If the articles on Albert Einstein, Nikolai Lenin or Mao Zedong went unchanged for 2 months, it would not mean that these individuals are not notable. It is fact that several Wikipedians have made positive contributions to this article, increasing its size from a few hundred to more than 3000 characters, and we would be remiss if we did not take that into consideration when reaching a consensus about whether to keep or delete this article. Truthanado 23:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the fact that a number of wikipedians worked on this article does not confer notability to Mr Mol. If he were notable, and the article established this notability (as, say, the article on Einstein does) then its dormant status would not be relevant. Bigdaddy1981 00:22, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the difference between the two cases is this. Einstein and the others are unquestionably notable. You walk down the street and say "Einstein" to someone, they're highly likely to know who you're talking about. You say "Simon Mol" to someone, they're liable to look at you funny. Einstein, Lenin and Mao are talked about in classrooms. Simon Mol isn't. Eistein, Lenin and Mao have numerous books written about them. Simon Mol doesn't. The similarity is that all these articles have, for the moment, reached the point in which no new information can be added. The difference is the watershed mark of notability, which this article has not achieved. Even the original author's edit summary, on the creation of the article, reads: (article about a journalist, notable in Poland for spreading HIV, gcheck welcomed). Not "notable journalist" or "notable author". Notable for one incident. In Poland. And, as I stated before, even Polish Wiki has problems with their version.--Sethacus 02:14, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as per Sethacus. —זכי Talk • Contributions • Edit counter 08:14, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The wiki community has been building this article in good faith for over eight months. It is both neutral and unbiased. Simon Mol's trial is ongoing and more information about his alleged crimes will likely surface in the near future. The article should not be deleted. Graham Wellington

KEEP- This is a true article of something that actually happened, why in the world should it be deleted, is someone trying to cover up the truth? It makes absolutely no sense to me.— Czerwony (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

  • Keep. This article should be displayed to the public so similar acts do not occur. There is no reason to repress and censor such terrible news at the hand of other peoples' lives which were ruined through such emotional and psychological damage. A criminal's acts are not out-weighed by how many anti-fascist articles or poems he/she had published.Rebio (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.Bigdaddy1981 05:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Comment please sign your comments using four tildes tildas. Ooops Bigdaddy1981 03:09, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Can we make them waltzing Ma tildas? Steve Dufour 12:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to the keep voters. Again, and this is the last time I'm going to say this: Wikipedia is NOT for news. Let me give you an example of an article that, on the surface, appeared to be news, but transcended that:Larisa Arap. A news story, yes, but one that has reached the Americans, the British, the French, the Germans, the Czechs. Mol's story is not going anywhere outside Poland. I'm coming dangerously close to adding WP:SOAP to the list of this article's offenses, based on the undue weight given this man's crimes, the edit summary at creation and some of the keep votes. Wikipedia is not the place to gather people around and say,pardon me, "Look what this nigger did!" If this had been an article on a famous writer, with references pointing to that, that just happened to have been arrested for a heinous crime, I might give it a second look. But, not a Goddamn single person supporting this article has come forward with any evidence to suggest that he is known outside of this crime. And, yes, it is a heinous crime, one for which he'll be brought before the greatest judge of all, God. We are not here, on Wikipedia, to make 'examples' of people. This is news, local news and should be treated as such. The global community hasn't stood up to take notice and neither should Wikipedia.--Sethacus 15:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Simon Mol is a well known European human rights activist who specialized in anti-racism and anti-fascism. He also published poetry and directed several plays that exposed the plight of African refugees. Graham Wellington 16:40, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply none of this has remotely been put into the article, Graham, or should I call you 67.83.219.204? [1] As I recall, you removed the prod, citing "numerous Polish publications". Where are they and do they justify notability outside his crimes? Why haven't they been integrated into the article?--Sethacus 20:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Reply Simon Mol is a notable writer who has published numerous anti-fascist anti-racist poems and narratives. And yes, he is also an alleged criminal. Many notable writers have also been accused of crimes. Had you not deliberately targeted this article for deletion, those facts would have been added in due time to the article. Polish newspapers don't count as legitimate sources? That is a bigoted view. It is becoming clear that you cherry picked this article due to the nature of Simon Mol's alleged crime. Graham Wellington 21:05, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What is the purported motivation? Bigdaddy1981 16:57, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Claims of "infecting nearly 20 women with HIV" are marginally notable, especially as the subject became so notorious in Poland. --Ghirla-трёп- 12:47, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Rename to something like HIV scandal in Poland, [[Category:HIV/AIDS]]. This person is completely non-notable, neither as writer nor as journalist, unless you're going to introduce common criminals and hustlers into Wikipedia now. greg park avenue 19:01, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Does not add up to real notability.--Bedivere 19:29, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Per above. Tazmaniacs 01:51, 23 August 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Simon_Mol&oldid=1138768903"