Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Shaver


 * 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 of the debate was speedy keep. As the original nominator, I am now satisfied that the page is not meant to be a backhanded attack page. And the article seems to be about someone reasonably notable. I therefore withdraw my nomination, thus allowing this AfD nomination to meet the speedy keep critera. → Ξxtreme Unction {yak ł blah } 12:15, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Mike Shaver
This page smells like one of the many backhanded attack pages we've been seeing here of late. I could be wrong, however, which is why I'm sending it to AfD instead of slapping a speedy tag on it. → Ξxtreme Unction {yak ł blah } 04:50, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete, nn-bio. Okay, it appears that this guy is, in fact, notable. Keep. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
 * Keep. Shaver appears to be notable as one of the founders of Mozilla and with 99,000+ Google hits. How many of those hits are to this individual, I don’t know, but the first few pages of hits apply to him. However, the article needs to be wikified a little. Get rid of the “tongue-in-cheek” long picture caption. &#9678;DanMS 06:13, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * P.S. 26,600 hits for “Mike Shaver” Mozilla. &#9678;DanMS 06:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 *  Speedy keep. --Merovingian 07:39, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep does not apply in this case, as the article does not meet the critera. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
 * Er, okay. --Merovingian 07:52, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep minor notability so long as it doesn't violate WP:NPOV--MONGO 10:07, 3 December 2005 (UTC)

Comments

 * Um, hi! I'm writing it, with Mike's permission. It's not an attack page. It's a biography, and it's written in his style, which is to say, tongue-in-cheekish. I'm making sure it chock full of fact-y goodness, though. Also, I appreciate the fact that you were trying to protect him. Beltzner
 * I suggest you check out the style guidelines before proceeding. Tongue-in-cheek style is unacceptable here. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
 * Will do.Beltzner
 * OK, first pass at the content is there. Decide as you will, I guess. Beltzner
 * Looks great now! -- Saikiri~ 07:07, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * So how do we get the deletion notice removed? I'm somewhat new to this process ... Beltzner 07:33, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The nominator has to give a "speedy keep" vote, or it must be proven (or obvious) that the nomination was made in bad faith. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)
 * Well if one follows the link to Shaver's blog, one would find plenty of references to a Beltzner, which definitely contradicts the grounds for the deletion nomination, i.e. it's an attack.
 * See Speedy keep for speedy keep criteria. --Aurochs (Talk | Block)


 * 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.