Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dennis Fetcho

 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 delete. Claims of wnning the unverified chess trophy remain unverified, and the claims were probably added to the article merely to avoid running into speedy criteron A7. The keep votes from anonymous users and very new users, as well as unsigned votes have been discarded as votes probably made by meatpuppets or sockpuppets, or other types of bad faith. Sjakkalle (Check!)  11:02, 12 September 2005 (UTC)

Dennis Fetcho
I believe this article is either flame bait set up by some individuals and/or utter nonsense. I had tag this page for Speedy deletion. However, the tag has been removed by the author BUT not posted for AFD. Please see discussion page for details. Hurricane111 15:11, 4 September 2005 (UTC) *Speedy delete, and be done with it Pilatus 18:43, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I can affirm that this article is neither flamebait or patent nonsense. The speedy deletion tag was rightly removed, though I do notice that there are some inaccuracies in the article. It could certainly do with a cleanup. I will try and add references and tidy up the article in general over the next few days. 213.114.172.139 15:57, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Article needs some work, but is extremely relevant:
 * http://www.phoneplusmag.com/agent/dfetcho.html
 * http://www.megapin.com/index.php?id=23&backPid=21&tt_news=5&cHash=8a672ea974
 * http://www.phoneplusmag.com/articles/0a1agen3.html
 * http://7mcpe.d62.net/
 * All show his relevance to the field of telecom engineering.
 * (preceding unsigned comment by 22:17, 4 September 2005)
 * Delete not notable G Clark 20:22, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedily deleted. Attack article -- short article that serves no purpose but to disparage its subject.  SWAdair | Talk 20:52, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Has since been restored / stubbified. Keep new stub.  SWAdair | Talk 21:03, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedily undeleted and removed offending stuff. Still a candidate for AfD though, because importance is asserted. My vote is to delete. Denni &#9775; 21:04, 2005 September 4 (UTC)
 * Throwing "UK National Chess Trophy" at Google gives ONE hit, which is Deletion_of_vanity_articles. The John Doe listed there won the prize in 1994. So speedy delete it again. Pilatus 22:07, 4 September 2005 (UTC)
 * So google counts as independant research now? Ridiculous! If I put "Dennis Fetcho won the prize in 1984 up on some website and google cached it, that would be enough to suddenly prove it true? I think the original authors of the page know a little bit more than you about the subject, sir. A simple google - original research does not make! --Bouquet 23:22, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Working Google is not much in the way of research but FAPP sufficient here. Pilatus 12:59, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, the attacks have returned, this page is of a nobody who somebody doesn't like. Zoe 23:42, September 4, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, nn. --fvw *  00:00, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Great article that needs some tidying up  (preceding unsigned comment by  ) 1:23, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * keep. it belongs.,
 * Keep. People need to be educated about known anti-Semite Dennis Fetcho. --Weev G N A A ™ 16:13, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Please note that the above User has no edits to articles, but only to votes and discussions. And I think the GNAA logo explains everything we need to know about this article.  Zoe 19:27, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Why do you discriminate against me for being a black homosexual? This sentiment among Wikipedia administrators is scandalous and is a throwback to pre-Civil Rights movement mentality. You are an embarassment to humanity. --Weev G N A A ™ 22:39, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very informative, an exposé on one of the leading telecommunications minds of our age. The information in this article opened my eyes to just how far the disease of anti-semitism in our society extends, most of which is fueled by the "internet" A must-read. -Fubster 16:16, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Fubster must be some kind of troll, though not a very good one, since this fulsome "endorsement" is over the top.---CH (talk) 03:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * The above is in reality User:67.8.109.96. Zoe 19:26, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Well, there you go, then.---CH (talk) 03:53, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Please do not post my IP address on a public page. I made no attempt to mask it, and there was no reason to post it. The only thing you could accomplish by posting my IP would be to subject me to portscans and malicious packets. Thanks, -User:Fubster. 22:50, September 5, 2005 (UTC)
 * Your IP address is published every single time you edit. Look at the Recent Changes page and the edit history of the article.  Every single person in the world sees  your ID when you edit.  And modifying other Users' discussion page comments is vandalism, and is treated as such.  Zoe 04:16, September 6, 2005 (UTC)
 * If my IP address is published every time I edit a page, was it neccicary to publish it on the comments page? After commenting, I have since created a user account and I would prefer that my comments are attributed to my username rather than to my IP address. After you posted my IP address, I noticed I had been subjected to two portscans. I understand that something like that is of very little consequence, but it does help to illustrate my security concerns. I am not a vandal and I am not a troll, but when a choice needs to be made regarding my own personal security, the choice is clear. Now rather than edit out my IP myself (which is 'vandalism' in your eyes), I am asking you to please remove it. Now that I have a user page, maybe a link to that would help people learn more about me, and help to deter security nuisances. Fubster 01:20, September 7, 2005 (UTC)


 * I love how User:Zoe encourages racial hatred, gay-bashing and denial of service attacks. --Weev G N A A ™ 22:55, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * My only hatred is towards trolls. Zoe 04:16, September 6, 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. This article has potential and simply because someone hasn't gone through and perfected it does not mean it should be deleted! All articles are a work in progress, the newer they are the more they will be edited until a consensus is reached. Please, let's try to focus on wiki-principles and not our own personal bias. I promise to take the edit-pen to this article as soon as a get a chance. Until then the current skeleton is enough to work with --Bouquet 22:45, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * This is a new account and this user has made only one edit, to this article. Denni &#9775; 23:09, 2005 September 5 (UTC)
 * How is that relevent? You're against new users participating? Isn't that very much against the spirit of wikipedia and encouraging new perspecitives. In fact, I would say it's HIGHLY POV for you to discourage new users due to the fact that they may disagree with your views. Are your views the only ones that should be heard on wikipedia? If so, I think it would be prudent for you to remove yourself from the site, as that is the antithesis of its purpose. --Bouquet 23:18, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the number of sockpuppets, trolls, and vandals Wikipedia attracts means we cannot assume all new users come with pure hearts. We therefore set some minimum standard of participation to ensure that those who are voting are those who have demosnstrated some commitment to Wikipedia and its goals. There is no POV involved. I would discount your vote no matter which side of the argument you were on, and regardless of my suspicions about your post. Denni &#9775; 23:51, 2005 September 5 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails to meet WP:BIO.  Claim about 1994 UK National Chess Trophy seems questionable and needs sourcing, as does in fact the entire article. Quale 04:03, 6 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete.  I might change my vote if somebody could explain what exactly the UK National Chess Trophy is. -- Austrian 00:26, 11 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. As far as I can tell, this article is adspam by a nn promotional speaker, and it also seems to me that this VfD has been hijacked by a multisock and talentless troll.---CH  (talk) 03:53, 12 September 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.