Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronald Bongo


 * 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 Speedy delete per WP:CSD, WP:SNOW, WP:IAR, WP:BLP, WP:ROUGE, and WP:ZOMGINVOLVEDADMIN. barneca (talk) 16:24, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Bongo

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

Repeatedly reposted page by someone whose purpose seems to be to "inform investors" that Mr. Bongo is a convicted felon. I think this violates WP:BLP, but bringing here for fuller discussion. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:41, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. There are sources for the claim that this person has been convicted of a felony, but not all felons are notable; in fact, most aren't.  I don't see any sources to verify that this is a notable person, and the article appears to exist primarily to disparage him, which would be a violation of WP:ATTACK and WP:BLP. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Article reads more like an attack piece of the subject as stated above. I'm also not sure if he is notable enough regardless of the attacks for an article anyway. Wildthing61476 (talk) 15:47, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and FisherQueen. nneonneo talk 15:50, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete as CSD#A7. It's been deleted 5 times for A7 or A10.  I think it pretty clearly fits the bill for A7.  I just removed lots of stuff from the article (sleuthing people's phone numbers) and some personal comments with BLP overtones, but I still think this is speedy material.  In fact, I had already warned the author I would block him for disruption if he recreated this article for the sixth time.  I won't re-delete myself, but will defer to NawlinWiki's judgement that AfD is appropriate. --barneca (talk) 15:51, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply I think speedy deletion was completely appropriate; maybe this deletion discussion will help persuade the creator that it isn't just that you are a rouge admin, but that this article really does need deleting. And of course, it's on more watchlists now...  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:54, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm about 2 seconds away from blocking the author. continually deleting other's comments on talk page, recreating the article, placing hangon tags, and reverting my removal of BLP material.  If you don't think a block for the next such action is appropriate, you should tell me so now. --barneca (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * My personal opinion? Go for it.  Have fun. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:58, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Orangmike has indef blocked the author for disruption. Since the only rational reason I could see for this AfD is FisherQueeen's "persuasion" theory, I suggest a speedy now that education is no longer an issue.  Not quite rouge enough to do it myself. --barneca (talk) 16:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

(EC) *Delete, salt, block. I tried to tag one of the SPA writer's attempts at posting this in the morning for speedy. The (perhaps unintended) effect of this article will be to greatly raise the subject's hits on Google and other search engines, indirectly publishing this derogatory information on the web. The article is an attack piece. The writer was informed by DGG, Barneca and the nom about the WP:BLP problems with the article, and simply blanked the warnings and reposted the article. (Note that Barneca has removed the worst of the BLP information at the time of writing this post). The subject is not notable, the subject's former company was not notable, and the article violates WP:NPOV and WP:BLP. Xymmax (talk) 16:09, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Barneca? OK with me to speedy the article.  NawlinWiki (talk) 16:07, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, I guess I waited until the party was over to put on a lamp shade :). My admittedly nonadmin view is go ahead and speedy - that unlisted phone number stuff was bad, and for all we know the felony stuff was mischaracterized, or overturned on appeal. Xymmax (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2008 (UTC)
 * You're going to make me learn how to close an AfD, huh? I should probably get some practice, so I'll do it.  Give me a few minutes to read directions, and somone take a look in half an hour and let me know if I forgot to do something.  I'm about to speedy close this per WP:CSD, WP:SNOW, WP:IAR, WP:BLP, WP:ROUGE, and WP:ZOMGINVOLVEDADMIN. --barneca (talk) 16:18, 16 April 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.