Talk:Xavier Von Erck

Von Erck clearly meets the guidelines of Notability. Why was this article deleted? He's the originator of a nationwide group that is famous and has been at the center of numerous mainstream articles nationwide and internationally. The group is bigger than him, no doubt, but if that's grounds for deletion, than we should delete numerous persons who have started large groups, even if their personal lives rarely meet the buzz that their groups get Fargobottom 05:26, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I am rarely happy to see new BLP related articles (ie bios oif kliving peopkle) but if tyou want we can take this to deletion. The content was not briliant either, we certainly shouldnt be trying to out the personal life story of this young and IMO well-intentioned individual, SqueakBox 05:30, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Nothing in this article was information not derived from mainstream articles that von Erck provided himself, with the exception of the alleged vendetta. I don't think he's a bad person, but certainly, there are people who disagree with his organization. I'd rather there be a "face" put to this otherwise (and necessarily) shadowy group than to pretend it came from oblivion. Von Erck remains a passionate advocate (who is expanding his organization beyond PJ, and doing it with very little paid help) and a controversial figure. Fargobottom 05:34, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, and I just think it is premature (I look forward to the day when he is notable enough to have an article here but dont think this is it), SqueakBox 05:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * At what point will he become notable enough for you? The man has already started a prominent organization, is branching off towards other ventures, has been a leader in a prominent mainstream TV show, and has of his own accord given interviews to the popular press, for articles at which he is the focus. Under your criteria, why should Craig Newmark and Kevin Rose or Aaron Swartz be given their own bios? Simply because their sites are more popular? I don't think you've given any reasonable justification or precedent as to why his bio should be completely omitted, except some vague reference to his privacy...which is totally irrelevant since his bio, as it is now, contains information he freely offered (repeatedly).Fargobottom 07:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Well the last 2 cases look notable, esp Swartz for his involvemnt in RSS specifications, the first chap much less so. I tend to be incresingly conservative in terms of thinking we should delete many thousands of bios of semi n notable people. I think something would have to happen to make Xavier more notable, for instance if he ran his own TV show (as Rose did) rather than just working behind the scenes, SqueakBox 21:52, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * OK I see that we have some biographical information about Erck, particularly how and why he started PJ, in the PJ article. That's suitable for me, though the discussion about his real name would've been easily resolved if he had his own bio. Fargobottom 22:56, 17 August 2007 (UTC)


 * I dont agree, I would equally have opposed that here too. Regards, SqueakBox 23:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)