Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harold Camping (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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:10, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Harold Camping
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Reads like a resume with no references for many pertinent things (like direct quotes); 99% of sources are self-published, COI & NPOV. R3ap3R.inc (talk) 02:34, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The sourcing in the article is in dire need of improvement (it's almost exclusively content written by Harold Camping!), but a quick GNews search reveals a pretty significant amount of coverage in reliable sources. That an article is faulty is not a reason to delete it. ɠǀɳ̩ςεΝɡ  bomb  04:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 18:14, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep. Masses of current references on Google News, which is pretty good going for an 89 year old, didn't even need to search 'archives'. The fact that the article is a horrible mess is a separate concern.Sumbuddi (talk) 23:43, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. He is popping up in the news so he's definitely notable and it would be worthwhile to keep the article.  It can be scrapped and rewritten to fit with Wikipedia style. PseudoOne (talk) 21:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Actually came across the page looking for info on the subject because of a news article I read. As was said above, much improvement needed, but still a noteworthy subject. Schluum (talk) 15:43, 7 December 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.