Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chuck Munson

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was KEEP. -Splash 22:44, 12 August 2005 (UTC)

Chuck Munson
Non-notable. The opposite of a vanity page - he is a user here (User:Chuck0), User:Hall Monitor is posting his home address, where he went to school and so forth, Chuck tried to delete it today repeatedly. Right now Chuck's banned for breaking 3RR trying to remove his address and whatnot from the page, discussion page and whatnot. This is just harassment of a Wikipedia user. He is not notable - Google "book chuck-munson" search yields nothing, Amazon.com book search yields nothing. Has a few thousand hits on Google due to his Internet postings over the years, but this does not make him encyclopedia worthy. More importantly Hall Monitor is just harassing a user of Wikipedia by posting his home address and whatnot which Chuck does not want posted. Ruy Lopez 06:05, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Weird, very weird, on all sides. Chuck0 seems upset that someone is naming the county he lives in. Anyway, Delete, nn. Sdedeo 06:23, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Following debate below, keep -- I trust claims of Munson's notability in anarchist circles. I leave it to someone else to sort out the weirdo edit war! Sdedeo 01:39, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * I disagree entirely with Ruy Lopez's reasoning, but we come to the same conclusion. Munson seems happy to use Wikipedia for publicity, but objects to having an objective biography. The information that User:Hall Monitor and I have recently adde to the article is relevant, ordinary biographical info- year of birth, colleges, name of blog. This is all material that Munson himself posts on the web currently, so his claims of invasion of privacy are preposterous. Munson has posted, repeatedly, his address on the web. This article merely said what city he is in. However, since the subject demands control of his articles to his own personal tastes, and since he is marginally notable, I say we delete this article and then his other projects. He says the articles are keeping him from earning a living and they certainly aren't feeding anyone here. I'd propose that if this VfD is successful then we should nominate the bundle of articles as well. If Munson isn't notable for starting them, then they likely aren't notable either. Infoshop.org, Alternative Media Project, Breaking Glass Press, and Practical Anarchy. The last appears to have an independent existence (Munson is no longer editor) and might be more notable. hasn't published in a over a year. -Willmcw 06:40, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Apparently, in Ruy Lopez's world, county of residence counts as "home address" -- that, or he's deliberately exaggerating. Also, since when is including where [one] went to school and so forth a form of harassment in a biography? But he's right about one thing: Delete as non-notable, vote contingent on deletion of Infoshop.org, Alternative Media Project, Breaking Glass Press, and Practical Anarchy, per Willmcw's reasoning. --Calton | Talk 11:03, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. chuck is very important in some circles- he does a lot, as can be seen from the above list of his projects.  infoshop.org is probably the premeire site of anarchist information on the internet, and is certainly notable; chuck, as its founder, should remain as well.  infoshop gets a lot of hits each day.  no books about him, but due to his outspokenness, prolific publishing of newspapers and on the internet, and the fact that virtually every anarchist in the US knows who he is, i think he is notable enough to warrant a keep.  as for his demands of control, i don't see this as any reason to eliminate the articles.  if anything, he's a more interesting subject now that he has launched a boycott of wikipedia.  he says he is going away, so we won't have to worry about his demands for control of biographical information.  --Heah (talk) 14:56, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I think it's fine to request that specific personal  information not be posted; that's no reason to delete an entire page about a noteworthy personality.  Voyager640 15:48, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Chuck is a clear and interesting writer. What must a person do to get an entry about them?  Invade Poland?  rhh1 16:23 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Chuck has been covered by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other major publications, because of his leadership among anti-corporate globalization activists and expertise in social movement organizing.  Just delete irrelevant personal info, and retain an entry about his political work and writing.  YF 16:24 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Interesting mini-controversy here. My research shows that this guy is notable in the anarchist community.  I think we need to be cautious determining notability for people/things within the anarchy category because, by definition, they place themselves outside the mainstream.  As such, we should not expect mainstream websites and commercial outlets like Amazon to validate notability as effectively.  What we do know is that this guy has published a book that's fairly notable within his community and he's done the same with some websites.  I don't think his prior behavior on Wikipedia or his attempts to control his biography content should be relevant to this VfD. Tobycat 16:42, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I created this article as well as Infoshop.org and some other related ones. I don't understand his behavior with regards to this article. I actually e-mailed him once to ask him to verify the information there (that I didn't add) and he just started removing stuff without explaining. I understand and share his concerns for security culture (I'm assuming that's his objection?) but there was nothing there that was more than basic biographical information. --Tothebarricades 17:23, August 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * Chuck Munson should have his own Wikipedia page -- and should be able to make changes to it when somebody posts something as privacy invading as his home address on it. Chuck is well known in radical librarian and anarchist circles. He's the founder and co-ordinator of Inforshop.org, a well-used anarchist website. His page needs to stay up. -- Jessica Books, NY, NY. 17:58, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.123.48.63 (talk • contribs) 6 August 2005
 * Now this is an odd controversy, and it brings up an interesting question: Does someone have a right to say "no, you cannot post a biography of me" or not?  If he was a public figure (Politician, Hollywood Star, etc), the answer would be more obvious.  But, he's not.  Really not entirely certain how to assess this.  I'm going to ercr on the side of caution, and say that since he's technically a private citizen (after all, notariety in 'Anarchist Circles' is not the same as being a notable public figure), he should have a right to have this removed if he doesn't want to be public.  Delete, for now.  Though if this story hits one of the major media outlets, well, he then becomes a public figure, so all bets are off. =/ Xaa 22:55, 6 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete for non-notability. Nandesuka 01:02, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep Worth keeping and developing further surely. Coqsportif 02:20, 7 August 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep per Tobycat. bpt 06:57, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Being notable "in anarchist circles" isn't too damn notable. --Nate Ladd 09:27, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Extreme weak keep, per sockpuppets. &mdash;RaD Man (talk) 09:50, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * "keep." Chuck was way out front on infoshop. Certainly original creative thinkers in any field belong here. editing issues should not affect decision on the entry.--Kathleen in Florida. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.119.229.42 (talk • contribs) 12:19, 7 August 2005
 * Keep Chuck not liking the fact that someone is posting his county of residence is an inappropriate use for a VfD. --Bletch 22:37, 7 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. Interested parties may want to read Munson's account of this on his blog,, in which he unfortunately gets most of the facts wrong. -Willmcw 23:31, August 7, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Why is there even a discussion about keeping Chuck? As a librarian I am opposed to this censorship in the form of deletion by a mob, and I am also opposed to efforts to invade his privacy by blocking Chuck's attempts to remove sensitive personal information from his entry.  While Chuck may be notable in small circles that are not to everyone's taste, he is indeed notable.  I have learned and gained a great deal from my short, mostly online, association with Chuck.  I am sure that many people have learned and gained from him.    If you don't like Chuck's entry or don't think he's notable, don't read it.  Perhaps the entry on a non-entity like Don Saklad would be more to your taste. -AmyM, NM. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.167.120.200 (talk • contribs) 15:28, 8 August 2005
 * Keep. The individual is notable within the anarchist community, but should not be allowed to censor his own article against the wishes of other editors. Hall Monitor 15:59, 8 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep. Article needs some work, and there should be a little more to assert notability, but seems good enough. Sean Black 03:09, 9 August 2005 (UTC)
 * delete Non-notable. --jenlight 04:34, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete vanity page / non-notable. -- in_on_the_killtaker 23:53, August 10, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete it! Vanity page! Sorry, I don't have a user thingy. -Dan O, Philly, PA 2005.08.11
 * This is not a vanity page. I didn't create it and if you've followed this controversy, I've been trying to temporarily keep some personal information off of the entry so I can find a job. People who know me can tell you that I'm not vain or interested in self-promotion. At the same time, it's laughable that a few people think that I'm non-notable. I happen to be a notable anarchist, activist, and librarian. I've been profiled by the New York Times, Washington Post, and the Kansas City Star. I've been interviewed by other newspapers and magazines, including media outside of the U.S. On most days, I wish I wasn't so notable. Chuck0 15:39, 11 August 2005 (UTC)


 * On most days, I wish I wasn't so notable
 * Don't worry. You're not. If you haven't already, why not vote for it's deletion? --jenlight 20:20, August 11, 2005 (UTC)
 * I am notable! This entry shouldn't be deleted, in fact, Wikipedia needs to have more entries on activists in various movements. These people are more notable than much of the obscure stuff which is covered by Wikipedia. 24.94.181.211 21:06, 11 August 2005 (UTC)
 * In case it isn't clear, 24.94.181.211 = Chuck0 = Chuck Munson. -Willmcw 23:22, August 11, 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete reason. --24.229.198.147 20:56, 11 August 2005 (UTC) Total waste of space and bandwidth.


 * Strong Keep Fits the Wikipedia requirements. Munson is notable for anarchist activism. I don't understand why this discussion is even necessary. Rstandefer 15:09, 12 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.