Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bill Greene


 * 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 delete. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 17:15, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Bill Greene

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

this is a vanity page, maintained by the subject himself under the user name "profg" Despaminator 17:18, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Losing Congressional candidate, otherwise best known for a website rankning ~1.7M on Alexa. Not much here. --Dhartung | Talk 17:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Getting 3% of the votes tells me that he was not a serious candidate and hosting a local radio show is also not a claim to notability Corpx 17:56, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: No particular claim to notability other than a by-election at which he came in sixth with sixteen hundred votes.  Six months as a local talk show host?  A so-called "PhD" from a diploma mill?  This is reaching, badly.    Ravenswing  18:15, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. NHRHS2010  Talk  20:35, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. As the subject of this article, I was as surprised as anyone to discover it here; it is not a vanity page, for I did not create it. However, I have attempted to correct and update it as often as necessary, as I have noticed one particularly biased individual from North Carolina has repeatedly included incorrect and/or misleading information. In response to a couple of the comments here: I don't just have a website with low Alexa "rankning", that website is the homepage of the grassroots activist organization I head up, which currently has one million members/subscribers (email-based, not web-based). I was not just a "local talk show host," our talk show was broadcast nationwide and distributed even further via webcasting and podcasting. Again, I am fairly indifferent as to whether the article is deleted or not; however, I will continue to correct it if biased and inaccurate information is inserted.  --profg 22:07, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete According to the article, he earned an ABD. Reminds me of the legendary title, so and so, B.A. (failed). DGG (talk) 05:55, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Addenda. I have to add, that the original reason that this article was recommended for deletion - that "this is a vanity page" - is actually not allowed as a reason for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for Deletion - 7.1 How to discuss an AfD - "The accusation "VANITY" should be avoided, and is not in itself a reason for deletion.") As a result, I recommend that the nomination should be withdrawn by the nominator. In addition, in response to the above comment, ABD is a valid title, as the Wikipedia link in the article itself shows.  --profg 17:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: Indeed, that is correct, but matched that with a failure to meet the standards of WP:BIO, and there you have it.   Ravenswing  18:20, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Response: Again, it doesn't matter much to me whether a Wikipedia article about me is deleted (honestly, there are New York Times articles on me I would love to see deleted, as incredibly biased and non-factual as they are), but I have to ask: in what way is there a failure to meet the standards of WP:BIO? Just saying it doesn't make it so. If the article does not assert or demonstrate notability, then delete this discussion, and use the db-bio tag to request speedy deletion. If this article doesn't meet the criteria for speedy deletion, but is an "uncontroversial deletion candidate," then use the prod tag. It just looks to me like this article was nominated for the WP:AFD process without merit on the original basis ("vanity"). --profg 13:05, 29 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and DGG. Bearian 19:27, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete I think his notability rests pretty much on RightMarch.org. I think this article should be deleted, but the material could be part of an article on RightMarch.org. There are plenty of references to the site online, and the organization raised over $100K last year, according to OpenSecrets.org - not huge, but not nothing either. Brianyoumans 16:17, 30 August 2007 (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.