Talk:Hank Eskin

And the creator of a lousy advert on wikipedia...

Edited to add information about secret service investigation, removal of 'looking for work' SHould be okay now - Idiotfromia

This really needs NPOVing now that his fan club have been told to stop it. Secretlondon 18:55, Nov 30, 2003 (UTC)

Wik, this page contains incorrect information and the subject of the article has asked that it be removed. Everyone on VfD says to redirect it anyway - what is the problem? Angela 20:50, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Since when can subjects of articles demand their removal? And if I'm not mistaken things on VfD have to stay there for 5 days, you can't prejudge the final decision just because the votes are unanimous after 2 days. Others might still vote to keep the article. --Wik 21:02, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

Oh for chrissakes it's stuff like this that gives Wikipedia a bad name and takes all the fun out of it. Just let the freakin' page be redirected. You all need to get a sense of perspective about this... Wikipedia rules are not the Constitution and occasionally, exceptions need to be allowed. Sheesh. Marteau 21:16, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)

Exceptions can be allowed if there's a good reason, which I don't see in this case. --Wik 21:37, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)

The person which this page is about asking for it be removed is not a good reason? What would be agood reason then? The FBI asking for it? Wik, with your stubborness you only alienate more and more people about you. andy 21:42, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)


 * This is most definitely not a good reason! Why should any person be able to decide unilaterally not to have an article about himself if others think he is significant enough to have one? --Wik 21:48, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)


 * I'm not going to get into a big discussion about it - I'm only going to explain my point of view and be done with this mess. The article contained personal and private information I do not want to have public. Sure, say I created Where's George?, but that's about all I want posted and the re-direct is fine.  Most everything on that page was really about WG and not me.  The rest of the information was just irrelevant, inaccurate, and/or personal/private.  And the only people who think I am significant enough to have one are the users of my website who have more than enough information on my site about me.  I am not a famous person nor a celebrity who needs or wants that kind of exposure.  This entire article was created by ONE over-zealous user who did not ask me if I wanted my personal and private information posted.  Hank Eskin 6:24 EST

Please delete the page, protect a stub at the same location, and post a note that I said so, to keep anyone from giving you any grief about it.

If there's false information there, he could possibly bring some complaint about libel against whoever wrote it. But if he just doesn't like it, there's no "right to privacy as a private citizen" nor any prohibition against "unauthorized biography" that could possibly apply here.

Even so, we have no intention of allowing wikipedia to be used as a platform for annoying the poor man, of course.

--Jimbo

From VfD


 * Hank Eskin - a web designer advertising his services. Secretlondon 21:33, Nov 29, 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete. Everything in this article that's worthwhile is covered adequately by Where's George. (Adding signature, oops) Onebyone 23:59, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Where's George - Idiotfromia
 * Delete. The important informaton can be moved into Where's George. Actually, maybe a redirect is in order.  RickK 23:51, 29 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Redirect. When Hank achieves notoriety beyond Where's George, then an article about him is in order. Marteau
 * Agree, Redirect. The vanity page is poorly written, so cannot be doing Hank any good. Where's George is an interesting article and can contain the worthwhile stuff from this article - Marshman 02:52, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Delete and recreate as redirect as author has requested his personal details be removed from the article history. Angela 18:58, 30 Nov 2003 (UTC)
 * Move to redirects for deletion. Delete and recreate as redirect. Martin 00:05, 2 Dec 2003 (UTC)