Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Allen Meadors (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. While if it had no consensus we might consider deleting and BPLREQDEL is an important policy, there is a clear consensus to keep here. Eddie891 Talk Work 18:03, 2 October 2020 (UTC)

Allen Meadors
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article was kept at AfD previously, however now we have a request from the subject of the article for the article to be deleted (11521543). I will remind the closer that under WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE, if a deletion discussion has no consensus and the subject wishes for the article to be deleted, it can be deleted. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:19, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Sam-2727 (talk) 17:19, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:08, 27 September 2020 (UTC)


 * Comment, having a couple of Chairs named after Meadors looks wikinotable? Coolabahapple (talk) 14:12, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't see any reason to disagree with the past consensus that he is notable, in particular, as the head of a university (WP:PROF). This article illustrates exactly why one should not pay to have a Wikipedia article created about oneself: because one cannot then subsequently pay to have it removed when it becomes embarrassing. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:02, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep Passes WP:PROF at the very least. The article is not poorly sourced (a couple statements could stand to have their sourcing improved, but they're incidental enough that they could also just be removed). XOR&#39;easter (talk) 18:17, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep, per the comments above. For a regular college professor, even a moderately notable one, I would have been inclined to go with the subject's wishes per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. But a university president is a public figure, a fairly significant one, for college towns sort of similar to an important local politician. We should not delete an article about such an individual, even if he requests it, just because a negative event occured. The 'Controversy' section is neutrally written and well sourced. It is not too long and doesn't overwhlelm the rest of the article. The BLP issues here have been handled properly. The subject is notable, and not just under WP:PROF but under WP:BIO/WP:GNG as well. With all due respect to the subject's wishes, the article should be kept. Nsk92 (talk) 11:15, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep as others have already said. The subject can make edit requests via the talk page if need be. -Kj cheetham (talk)
 * Keep. The article says he was "accused of urging a vice president to destroy a letter that said the offer would be in exchange for renewing Aramark's contract". This seems to be correctly sourced. And urging now en:wp to destroy an article that says he urged someone to destroy... is only a PR error, turning what could be argued as a one shoot error into a behavioral pattern. Pldx1 (talk) 11:01, 30 September 2020 (UTC)


 * 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.