Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Parry


 * 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. seicer &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  02:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

James Parry

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

Fails WP:BIO and lacks non-trivial coverage by reliable third party publications, while highly dependent upon primary sources and Usenet message boards. JBsupreme (talk) 20:37, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep It's fscking Kibo!  You don't get much more notable than that, for a person notable within the remit of cyberspace (as it was, before these intaweb things).
 * Besides which, the coverage by Wired should be sufficient for any rational purpose. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:59, 8 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. Is eponymous and mentioned as such in wiktionary (which is based on FOLDOC, so should incorporate direct FOLDOC ref in the article as that is direct support for his notability). DMacks (talk) 21:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Neutral — Either way. But if the article is deleted, whatever of value from it should remain in the corresponding entry at Notable Usenet personalities (Kibo), without making the entry too big. — Loadmaster (talk) 22:29, 8 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep C'mon - this is Kibo you're talking about. I concur with Andy Dingley. And that's not just because Kibo once sent me an email. (The highlight of my year).Xrobau (talk) 05:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Even I've heard of Kibo, and I never actually used Usenet back then. He's a Usenet celebrity, back from when it was small enough that you could be one. Looks like there were some actual news articles on him, too, in addition to the Wired one (plus various mentions of him and Kibology. Trouble is, this is all from before the Web really took off, so they're not available online. - makomk (talk) 11:57, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep, you should do a Google books search before nominating something like this. WillOakland (talk) 16:21, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:26, 9 September 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.