Talk:Antoine Dodson/Archives/2018
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Stop trying to delete this article
Dodson IS the story, as the sources show. There is no doubt he is internationally notable. Rapidosity (talk) 19:29, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Please acquaint yourself with the outcome of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoine Dodson, which was to delete the article. Favonian (talk) 19:33, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes but the policy is you're not allowed to speedy delete the article unless it's a copy of the deleted article. This is a newly written article, so to be deleted it requires a vote. If it where otherwise, no matter how famous the person got he could never have an article. It would be irrational to have a policy that an article can never exist just because it was deleted in the past. What's more is the administrator deleted the article improperly last time. The consensus was to keep. He abused his power. Rapidosity (talk) 19:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
- Haters: Delete this at your peril. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.206.140.213 (talk) 01:57, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- I personally think that this article shouldn't be deleted.Edge578 (talk) 04:38, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- Then personally present the argumentation for keeping the article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Antoine Dodson (2nd nomination), where this is being discussed. Here is not the right spot; this page is for discussing improvements to the article. --Lambiam 08:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)
- Yes but the policy is you're not allowed to speedy delete the article unless it's a copy of the deleted article. This is a newly written article, so to be deleted it requires a vote. If it where otherwise, no matter how famous the person got he could never have an article. It would be irrational to have a policy that an article can never exist just because it was deleted in the past. What's more is the administrator deleted the article improperly last time. The consensus was to keep. He abused his power. Rapidosity (talk) 19:36, 24 August 2010 (UTC)
I think this should definitely stay up. I want to know if they catch the jerk that tried to hurt her. And people aren't making fun of him, they're saluting him. This guy is a hero, he rescued his sister from that jerk that tried to hurt her. No harm in paying homage to someone who's commited to the protection and welfare of his family. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belflaurn (talk • contribs) 21:41, 27 August 2010 (UTC)
- See above: this talk page is for discussing improvements to the article; it is not the place to discuss the deletion proposal or the topic. If you can cite reliable sources for the claim that people are not making fun of him but saluting him, add them to the article. Wikipedia is not for paying homage. --Lambiam 06:23, 28 August 2010 (UTC)
Closed
Closing the discussion per Lambiam. —Bill Price (nyb) 22:26, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
Speling erur
"Buisness ventures" obviously needs spelling corrected. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.116.10.81 (talk) 17:24, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
" in a video posted to his YouTube channel"?
Why the article is not sourced properly? There is no link to the channel anywhere in the article. 93.185.29.85 (talk) 16:33, 25 November 2018 (UTC)