Talk:Thomas Cannon (author)

Speedy
Since the creator is a registered editor, I will assume good faith and ask if there any sources for the article. At first sight it seemed to be an attack page, saying that someone is famous because he published "Ancient and Modern Pederasty Investigated and Exemplify'd" in a page with no wikifications nor citations, even though the article looked a bit serious. Baristarim 07:24, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Another moron who thinks it's below him to do even a simple Google search. e.g. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22thomas+cannon%22+homosexuality&btnG=Search Engleham 08:36, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Better watch for PA - comments like or  are unacceptable - we are not in a playground.. Baristarim 08:57, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Stop nominating the page for deletion you ignorant vandal prick. I have supplied a full reference. Engleham —Preceding undated comment added at 09:01, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, had you done it before and had included an accessible web-link when you had created the article, we wouldn't be here now, would we? How am I supposed to know about a joker who lived in the 18th century and wrote about pedestary? Like I cared anyways.. But better watch for civility, such violations are out of line. As I said, this is not the court of the local junior high.. Baristarim 09:06, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

"had you done it before and had included an accessible web-link when you had created the article, we wouldn't be here now" Oh thank you, Little Big Man. It's a lesson for all of us: ignorant lazy pigs demand feedbags. http://ecl.dukejournals.org/content/vol31/issue1/ Engleham 09:25, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Your only source requires a payment to read. IrishGuy talk 18:18, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Sell a potato. Engleham 13:32, 2 August 2007 (UTC)

WikiProject class rating
This article was automatically assessed because at least one WikiProject had rated the article as stub, and the rating on other projects was brought up to Stub class. BetacommandBot 06:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Requested move 24 January 2023

 * The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. 

The result of the move request was: moved (non-admin closure)   ❯❯❯  Raydann  (Talk)   11:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

– No PRIMARYTOPIC by page view stats or long-term significance, page view stats [|Thomas_Cannon_(footballer)|Thomas_Cannon_(philanthropist)|Tom_Cannon here]. Some other popular pages like the philanthropist also have long-term significance, so all things considered DAB should be at base name. Ortizesp (talk) 08:22, 24 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thomas Cannon → Thomas Cannon (author)
 * Thomas Cannon (disambiguation) → Thomas Cannon
 * Support per nomination. There are six men listed upon the Thomas Cannon (disambiguation) page, with no indication that the 18th-century author's renown has surpassed the combined notability of the remaining five men. —Roman Spinner (talk • contribs) 08:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Support per nom. Though Thomas Cannon (footballer) had a massive pageview spike at the end of 2022, he appears to be an athlete at the beginning of his professional career, so his views likely stem in part from WP:RECENTISM; based on the current situation, it seems best to treat this as a WP:NOPRIMARY situation. ModernDayTrilobite (talk • contribs) 22:43, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion. ✅ Dr. Vogel (talk) 11:58, 31 January 2023 (UTC)