Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Derek Smart (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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 15:00, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Derek Smart
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

I recently removed some negative information from this article referenced to a single source. While doing so, I noticed more negative information which was poorly sourced, so I removed that also. The resulting article does not appear to be adequately sourced to meet our notability guidelines. Please bear in mind that issues surrounding this article were once the subject of a 2006 ArbCom case and a more recent amendment request (by me) after I noticed further issues with the article. Cla68 (talk) 23:34, 26 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Oppose: some of the negative things removed were removed simply because they only had one RS backing them up. Cla68 is intentionally interpreting BLP's to the strictest terms to remove anything negative from his article to the point where he hopes there will not be enough left to even have an article at all. Mr. Smart is a notable figure in the gaming world whose overhyped games and controversial internet interactions with detractors of his games has built him a legacy that still echoes in gaming communities on the internet to this day. Cla68 needs to stop trying to sanitize Smart's article and just let it build back up. Here are some RS's that have been gratuitously removed,,,, and I'm sure there are more out there.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 03:23, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak oppose This has been suggested this prior, and it was brought before AFD (though I'm not sure by whom, please pardon my rush). In fact, Cla68, I think Bill Huffman was in favor of its deletion, interestingly enough!  However, Derek Smart the man has been mentioned in reliable sources, so there is a case to be made for keeping the article.  I have always been on the fence with regards to this, and considering the time I make for wikipedia, taking up a definitive vote where others would carry the burden of my choice does seem hasty.  With that said, the article is not unsourced, so I wouldn't call this an open and shut case for closing.  Cla68 may need to bear with watching the article and working with other editors, if the article is kept and he wishes it to improve. 72.192.46.9 (talk) 14:24, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Administrative Keep - Stripping out content and then proposing for deletion for alleged content insufficiency offends my sense of editorial fair play. It seems beyond doubt that this is a notable subject for an article, I add. Carrite (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:03, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:03, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Note that the ArbCom gave admins permission to delete this article without an AFD:
 * Any user may fully apply the principles and practices of Biographies of living persons to Derek Smart. This may include deletion of the article and its history as well as its talk pages and archives and the project pages and talk pages of this Arbitration proceeding. Requests for arbitration/Derek Smart   Will Beback    talk    21:07, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
 * That was for prevention of libel in case someone posted something that could get Wikipedia sued, not as permission to delete due to lack of notability.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 22:09, 27 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep: We do not delete articles due to their vandalism potential, what we do is we lock these pages down. If we didn't we would loose tons of valuable pages such as George W Bush and Barrack Obama. Now I'm not saying the Derek Smart is a figure as important as these presidential figure, but he is still a notable person in the video gaming community and I'd argue one of the few big names to come out of game designing. His work on the Battlecruiser series is for better or worse legendary. There's a lot of useful ways to handle the problem of vandalism and libel, deleting valuable articles however is not one of them. --Deathawk (talk) 06:01, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - Nom's specific rationale for deletion is notability. The coverage in Computer Games Magazine #196 alone would appear to be sufficient for inclusion. Marasmusine (talk) 14:21, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Speedy Keep - He has been more than adequately covered by the gaming press. His series of games have received reviews, and the epic usenet flamewar he  was involved in has been also covered. -- Whpq (talk) 17:08, 28 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep - As has previously been mentioned, apart from being a public figure and notable gaming industry veteran, the guy is a legend (for good, bad or ugly). Just one trip to any search engine shows hundreds of thousands of hits from interviews, seminars, forum postings, gaming related etc. The problem with his Wiki page is the same that afflicts all other Wiki pages in that it is subject to not only vandalism but also posts which clearly violate WP:BLP as well as WP:POV. It seems that every time something major happens in which he is involved, people make a beeline for his Wiki page entry in an attempt to vandalize it or add entries which are not only libelous and defamatory but also which clearly violate Wiki rules. Case in point: there is on-going legal battle between a guy (David Allen) who he (Smart) publicly fired from the company that he Smart is now President of. So it comes as no surprise that since that happened (back to May 2010) new Wiki editors like Wikiposter0123 are once again popping up and attempting to not only taint the page but also have it deleted. They have also tried to have that libelous Follies website (which is hosted by a known Smart detractor Bill Huffman) added as an entry to his Wiki page for years and with no success. The talk pages show this effort as well as Huffman's own attempts to influence the page entries themselves. The solution, just like other Wiki pages which have the same fate, is to just lock the page and have it only edited by admins or credible Wiki editors. Wildcard999 (talk) 13:40, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Case in point: there is on-going legal battle between a guy (David Allen) who he (Smart) publicly fired from the company that he Smart is now President of. So it comes as no surprise that since that happened (back to May 2010) new Wiki editors like Wikiposter0123 are once again popping up and attempting to not only taint the page but also have it deleted.
 * First off, I've never heard of that legal battle, so your connection is completely false. Secondly, I made a lot of bold edits with the point that the page currently shows none of his controversy and that controversial moments(like him attacking a coke machine) aren't covered in the page even when reliable sources are there to back it up. I understand now that website(Flame War Follies) isn't appropriate to Wikipedia(even though I think it's full of info people looking for stuff on Derek Smart would find interesting), and referring to his life as being "like a public soap opera" was a little harsh(albeit true). But I maintain that more needs to be added on this guy that he is a controversial person, not just your typical poorly received independent game developer, and that I make no effort to "taint" his article, just that I try not to get controversy scrubbed from controversial articles.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 20:10, 29 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikiposter, you twice added a link to a website dedicated to attacking Smart. Cla68 (talk) 00:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I've already stated that I realize now that it is not appropriate to Wikipedia. However whether or not it is an attack site is debatable(which I'm sure you will because you view criticism of Derek as an attack and not as a fair view of him). The site chronicles and discusses Derek Smart, and I think accurately. The notion that I added that site to attack Derek Smart and not just to try and provide reliable information is a result of your disagreeing that the site is a fair representation of him which I happen to view it as. Please do not insinuate that I have something against Derek and that I want to make him look bad simply because I want an accurate reflection of the drama and controversy surrounding his life.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 01:19, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Just to reiterate, the site is a valuable site for people who want to look into Derek Smart(try reading it if you want to evaluate so for yourself), and I still feel that including it would be justified if it were not for rules by Wikipedia which forbid such things in people's biographies.Wikiposter0123 (talk) 01:21, 30 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - he's fading into history, but he did write at least one fairly popular game that was published by a major software house, and there are lots of sources to attest to his existence. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:12, 29 July 2010 (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.