Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paul Lewis


 * 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 delete. --Core desat 00:47, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Paul Lewis

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability problem. A reportedly very good person, but I failed to see any reason for inclusion in an encyclopedia, being hardly notable beyond his church community. `'Míkka 20:50, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. It's incredibly tacky to call for deletion of an article just because you've written an article about another person of the same name and want yours to come up first in the searches. That's what this looks like, after all. VivianDarkbloom 22:02, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Quite crazy vote, I must say. There are a dozen persons with the same name, with many referenced in wikipedia, and I am in progress of writing the corresponding article stubs, for the purpose of disambiguation: Paul Lewis (disambiguation). `'Míkka 22:20, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You could do with a read of the no personal attack policy, couldn't you? VivianDarkbloom 22:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Why don't you start from yourselves? `'Míkka 22:45, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Given his recent ludicrously overheated comments, such as this, this, this, and this, VivianDarkbloom hasn't bothered to read the policy himself -- or maybe he thinks it'S for the little people? --Calton | Talk 02:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep per above. User has created Paul Lewis (professor) - an article that itself could potentially be AfD'd, but I'll recuse myself since I've posted in this debate. Plus, the fact that a museum had an exhibit on him...I think that's the essence of notability. Smashville 23:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I started three Paul Lewis artickles and wasten my times disambiguating for the whole dozen of lewises. You accusations is spit in my face. `'Míkka 01:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment Read both articles. Professor Lewis and Canadian Lewis appear to be equally notable.  I think Vivian has a point.  Most of us would have missed the connection between the article nomination and the nominator's article.  Mandsford 00:17, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The connection is very simple and not at all evil: I noticed that in wikipedia there is a dozen (!) different "Paul Lewises" are referenced. All I did I disambiguated them and along the way I doubted in notability of this one. What is your bloody problem with that? `'Míkka 01:27, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Please explain how canadian Lewis is notable at all. "Lewis arrived in London in 1914, finding work at White's Barbershop" ... "After the closure of White's Barbershop in 1948, Lewis took a variety of odd jobs," "Lewis became a trustee at Beth Emmanuel Church" ??? Like I said, a good man, so what?  `'Míkka 01:20, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Reply Oh, I didn't say he was that notable. I said that he and the subject of your article "appear to be equally notable".  There's a difference.  Mandsford 16:26, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment: I don't really care about the survival of any of the Lewises; none of them is my buddy, but this surge of assuming bad faith is sickening. `'Míkka 01:38, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * No one is assuming bad faith. We're assuming a conflict of interest. Smashville 02:12, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, really? `'Míkka 05:58, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * How exactly, does "Conflict of Interest" apply here? My God, Mikkalai is actually Paul Lewis! --Calton | Talk 02:40, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Fer' Crying Out Loud, People, lay off Mikkalai! This article obviously needs to be deleted. He's a non-notable church-going dead black guy. Having a reading room named after you is not enough. humblefool&reg; 07:31, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:BIO and WP:N. There are probably millions of people with such faint claims to notability as having cut a bandleader's hair or having been a trustee of a religious congregation, or having been an "endearing figure." (edited)Edison 14:28, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment. I have no intention of starting a flame war or appearing to assume bad faith, so I have struck out my vote. Nominator seemed to take my vote personally, so I'm just going to stay out of this debate. Especially after the closure was reverted and apparently a vote against is a "spit in the face". Smashville 14:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * What I took personally is disparaging comments. And the closure was reverted because it was knee-jerk out of process. `'Míkka 22:43, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Unless you are the Paul Lewis article, I made no disparaging comments. Smashville 23:21, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * ROTFL `'Míkka 15:28, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Is either article about me? No?  Forget it then.  Paul Lewis, Peoria city councilman 22:45, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Locally famous? Maybe. Provincially, nationally, internationally, or globally famous? No. Nor am I seeing anything except minor reliable sources. --Calton | Talk 02:40, 27 September 2007 (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.