Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brice Dickson


 * 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. Shereth 19:01, 24 June 2008 (UTC)

Brice Dickson

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable academic. No evidence is presented that this academic rises above others of his discipline or specialty, aside from his short stint as head of a a human rights commission. Relevant Google hits are few, with the only one that wasn't a listing of his books being a BBC article about a politician urging him to resign his HRC post Fails WP:PROF. (Contested speedy.) - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 03:46, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Co-sign deleter. Y5nthon5a (talk) 04:12, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable as a human rights official. See this Google News archive search for abundant coverage by reliable sources. --Eastmain (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Northern Ireland-related deletion discussions.   —Eastmain (talk) 04:44, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Eastmain's Google News discovery. The gentleman was clearly an important actor in a prominent area of NI governmental affairs, as reliable sources attest. Townlake (talk) 05:15, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep per Eastmain's GoogleNews results. The subject may not be notable under WP:PROF but he is notable under WP:BIO for his role as the NIHRC chairman. It'd be good to add some references regarding his NIHRC activities to the article. Nsk92 (talk) 05:35, 19 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete for same reasons as Alison Mawhinney. Mr. Dickson's notability comes from the same reasons and the same type of accomplishments and interests as Ms. Mawhinney. Rotund, but sweet (talk) 02:35, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * So why then did you vote Keep for Mawhinney and Delete for Dickson? In any event, Dickson appears a lot more notable than Mawhinney to me. He was a major human rights official who received a great deal of coverage in the mass media. She is just an academic specializing in human rights research. The two aren't really comparable, so logically it should be Keep for Dickson and Delete for Mawhinney, not the other way around. Nsk92 (talk) 05:31, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * NO: I voted as I believed was the logical consequence of pointing out that Mawhinney and Dickson are equals as far as I am concerned, and what's good for the gander is good for the goose. Also, I have updated Mawhinney's page in case anyone wants to take a look to reconsider their opinions. Rotund, but sweet (talk) 12:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I still don't get you. If you think that their notabilities are equal, then why did you vote differently in the two AfDs? Are you making a WP:POINT here? Nsk92 (talk) 16:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep because of the Commission. DGG (talk) 03:11, 20 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep due to his position on the commission and the many news stories relating to that found by Eastmain. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:52, 22 June 2008 (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.