Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Theodore Beale


 * 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 keep. There is substantial support for the retention of this article by established users, while no users with > 50 edits support its deletion. Furthermore, the references provided in Theodore_Beale indicate sufficient coverage of Theodore Beale in third-party reliable sources to establish a presumption of his notability per the general notability guideline. John254 02:01, 16 June 2008 (UTC)

Theodore Beale

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

I believe this Biographical article fails to meet WP notability guidelines. Deletion has been discussed on the talk page, and there has been no compelling argument against deletion. Messiahxi (talk) 14:23, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep He seems to meet the notability criteria although I agree the article needs a whole lot of work to improve it and make it properly neutral. Jasynnash2 (talk) 15:42, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with Messiahxi. This Biographical article clearly fails to meet WP notability guidelines.  There's more information about his father and unsourced "controversies" that no one has ever heard of than there is actual biographical material.Xday (talk) 23:32, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I see absolutely no valid reason for deletion here. Numerous references to this individual's works from literary reviews to articles in the New York Times regarding video game works, to public, on-air media discussion regarding his controversial views. It is true that there was a discussion on the talk page about deleting the article (mostly promoted by the nominator of this AfD) but half or more of those who commented on the proposal seem to think he is notable enough for an article.  Article may need some further improvement, but the nominator's contention seems unsound to me, and the other "Delete" is basically an "I've never heard of it" argument. Zero policy violations here.  ◄   Zahakiel   ►  03:27, 12 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - As Zahakiel describes, there's no policy reason to delete. Anecdotally, I turned to Wikipedia to find out who Vox Day was, having encountered the name elsewhere. So there's at least one person (me) who found this entry useful--and I'm not so arrogant to believe that I'm that unusual; if I found it useful, others will. It's useful, it doesn't violate policy. So keep it. –RHolton ≡ – 16:09, 13 June 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.