Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ken Jennings

Ken Jennings
This is non-notable; it's about a guy on a trivia game. Come on.

Note: Nomination for VFD was by User:67.161.57.4|Talk


 * Keep. Is this some kind of joke? --Carnildo 00:24, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, obviously, and block nominator for trolling. The same anon editor voted (twice, no less) to keep Nancy Zerg, a less significant Jeopardy contestant, writing "She's very noteworthy. She got interviews and personality features and crap over the past week. That's notable." Gamaliel 00:45, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. I can hardly believe this was put up for vfd. Euphoria 00:47, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep, someone needs to read the bit about disrupting Wikipedia to prove a point. -Fennec (&#12399;&#12373;&#12400;&#12367;&#12398;&#12365;&#12388;&#12397;) 00:47, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * I apologise about disrupting the WP to prove a point; however, as one who has worked hard on both the KJ article since June 2004, and wrote much of the Zerg article, I'm not pleased that someone put the latter up for VFD, as if to say "Your work is crap, it doesn't deserve a place on Wikipedia" -- especially, someone who's been featured in countless interviews and magazine features (as with Ken) over the past week. User:67.161.57.4 | User:Markl222
 * The vote on Nancy Zerg seems to be favoring merging the contents into the article on Ken Jennings. Almost nobody is advocating deleting it outright. --Carnildo 00:57, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Please don't make the mistake of taking wikipedia's decisions, debates, and procedures personally. Obviously, listing the Nancy Zerg article was not a personal attack on you.  It wasn't even a judgement on the quality of the article, but a judgement on the notability of the subject of the article.  Don't assume people are saying "Your work is crap, it doesn't deserve a place on Wikipedia" to you unless they actually say that. Even if they did, there is still no call to abuse vfd or wikipedia to make some sort of point.  Do your arguing in the relevant place, in this case Votes for deletion/Nancy Zerg, don't waste everyone's time, including yours, on these statements which will be completely ignored.  Gamaliel 02:44, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Keep, and we should think about removing this frivolous VfD early. Rhobite 01:08, Dec 8, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Do I need an explanation here? TheProject 04:07, 8 Dec 2004 (UTC)