Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RaD Man (3rd 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Keep Jtkiefer  T - 02:41, 3 October 2005 (UTC)

RaD Man

 * For prior deletion discussions, see Articles for deletion/RaD Man/2004-10-18 and Articles for deletion/RaD man.

non notable "artist" Drama Queen 09:44, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep this has been on VfD THREE times already!!! Ryan Norton T 09:46, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Question What's the third time - I'd like to have a look as the two votes above seem tangled and inconclusive?    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  13:16, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Figure appears to be significantly notable within his field.  Hall Monitor 16:35, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. His pimp hand remains strong, and he will likely kick the bitch who VFD' him to the curb for not keeping up her end of the bargain. --Jscott 16:49, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I dislike WP articles about WP contributors, but he's gotten considerable verifiable attention from niche media.  The field seems frankly to be near the edge of non-notability, but this person seems to have made a lasting impact on his field, which is my main criterion for inclusion of biographies.  Barno 18:22, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I dislike WP articles about WP contributors. --[[Image:Ottawa flag.png|20px]] Spinboy 19:30, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Are you implying that the minute a person's hands are dirtied by the act of Wikipedia contribution, they are no longer worth noting, worth having information about on Wikipedia? You have quite the hitlist ahead of you! --Jscott 20:15, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Rad Man is a significant historical figure in the artscene, regardless of the fact that he happens to help out with Wikipedia from time to time.  Dilvie 20:18, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. He's no less significant than he was last time. Grace Note 00:35, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * And as I wrote last time: "It is clear that you are rather hoping to hustle it out by force of numbers. You will keep listing it until you get your majority, claim the vote was consensual and delete the article. You might just as well not bother with the vote and go the whole hog." I should set up as Gypsy Zen at this rate. Grace Note 00:46, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I wish we had more articles on wikipedians, insofar as I wish that notables from many fields would contribute. Sabine's Sunbird 00:59, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep extremely notable in his field, has been a media source, interviewed numerous times, and given multiple lectures... why can folks not accept the decision of the PAST 2 VFD's!?!??! On another note: Can we officially declare an article notable enough to keep it off AfD permanently?  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 02:28, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep and please stop trying to erase this its not in the spirit of wikipedia Yuckfoo 05:24, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep non-notable? You're kidding. --Avatar-en 06:57, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * keep as per ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png. --Apyule 07:11, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Bad-faith nomination. Do we have to keep voting on AfD until someone who doesn't want the article gets the result they want one time?--Nicodemus75 18:50, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notable media whore. // Gargaj 19:09, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn/vanity, same league as Sylvain Dubord above. I hope you aren't voting keep because you know him from wikipedia, nepotism disgusts me in all its forms. -- red stucco 08:58, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Its not nepotism... Its the facts jack... Results 1 - 10 of about 34,500 for "radman" ACiD -wikipedia. (0.27 seconds)  ALKIVAR &trade;Radioactivity symbol.png 23:53, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * This may have been an attack nomination by a fly-by-night account; I notice that was created one week ago and has less than 20 edits.  Hall Monitor 00:00, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I have no prob with this article. Alf melmac 07:18, 2 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.