Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tilman Hausherr (2nd 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 in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was keep. - Mailer Diablo 10:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Tilman Hausherr
Is he notable? Per WP:BIO What proof? We need more proof than his Wiki friends saying so.

Let's leave aside for now the fact that this article was concidered for deletion a while back. He and his supporters cannot demonstrate enough notability for this article! What TV show or programme has he been on? Potters house 14:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment, "never heard of him" is not a good deletion reasoning. I'm unsure how he meets WP:BIO though as the provided sources mostly make trivial mention of Herr Hausherr.--Isotope23 14:47, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete He is no one special. I for one have never heard of the guy. If he can prove his notability then maybe, but just what is he notable for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Potters house (talk • contribs)
 * Comment. Did you actually read any of the Wikipedia guidelines?? Did you read the first AfD? There were many strong compelling points proven there. -- Nish kid 64 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Just because you haven't heard of someone does not mean they are not notable. He meets WP:BIO and he is considered one of the strong critics of Scientology. His article is linked in various other articles, as well. Apparently, from reading the first AfD, he is a very influential anti-Scientology figure in Germany. -- Nish kid 64 14:58, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Commment Here is the first AfD for interested parties to read... and how does he meet WP:BIO specifically? I don't see anything that shows he meets WP:BIO, though I think this may be a case where someone doesn't meet WP:BIO, but the article should still stay because a compelling deletion reason was not given.--Isotope23 15:02, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. "The person made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in their specific field." He's not part of an enduring historical record, but he has made widely recognized contributions. -- Nish kid 64 15:28, 1 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment I think that this AfD by User:Potters house is in bad faith, and is related to my participation in the editwar for Potter's House Christian Fellowship. --Tilman 15:21, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, this is a nomination made in bad faith by User:Potters house in retaliation for Articles for deletion/Johnny Lee Clary (2nd nomination). Even though Mr. Clary already has an article illegitimately created under his stage name (Johnny Angel (wrestler)), Potters house thinks that Mr. Clary should be entitled to two articles. -- Antaeus Feldspar 15:29, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. Relevant comments only. Don't turn this into some edit war over bad faith nominations or retaliations. We will proceed with nominating for a consensus in a civilized manner. -- Nish kid 64 15:33, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm willing to give a pass on WP:BIO for now because this nom makes no case for deletion and the last AfD was a consensus keep.--Isotope23 15:31, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Clary has this type of notability but it was claimed that he had none or very little:

Oprah, Montel, Jerry Springer, Rikki Lake, Phil Donahue, Sally Jessy, Pat Robertson's 700 Club, Billy Graham's Radio show, Geraldo Rivera, Queen Latifah, Carol and Marilyn Real Friends, Montel Williams, A&E Investigative Reports, ABC World News Tonight, Bertrice Berry, Rolanda, The Today Show, A Current Affair, NBC's Donny Deutsch The Big Idea, TBN's Praise The Lord show, many national and international Newspapers and National TV Shows in Australia, England, Holland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Sweden, and Wales. He has appeared all over the Nation of Australia on ABC Radio as well as ABC's "Enough Rope" hosted by Andrew Denton also appeared with the Australian KKK leader on the Today show in Australia.

If Tilman cannot provide at least half of the notability of Clary then he should be deleted. Potters house 15:38, 1 September 2006 (UTC) (moved from the talk page, which we do not use for AfDs)
 * Comment Sorry, that is not the way it works. We don't do comparative notability at Wikipedia.  We have policies and guidelines and each is applied to articles individually.  Besides, last time I checked being on "daytime talk TV" wasn't much of a case for meeting WP:BIO.--Isotope23 17:04, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, no new arguments from previous AFD other than "I'm mad about some other AFD". Please don't use AFD to attempt to prove points.  Kuru  talk  20:05, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - There are thousands, and thousands of critics of Scientology. He is not notable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Getaway (talk • contribs)
 * Keep - notable. Flying Jazz 02:27, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Regardless of first AfD and questions of retaliation, sounds pretty nn.-Kmaguir1 08:23, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - Yeah, I have heard of him outside of Wikipedia, so nyah. =) I don't see anything particularly distressing in the previous AfD either, and what has changed its notability since then. At worst, this is merge material. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 10:47, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep one of the more outspoken critics of scientology.  ALKIVAR &trade;[[Image:Radioactive.svg|18px|]] 14:33, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Alkivar. Please be mindful of WP:POINT; not liking an AfD's result is not in and of itself a reason for a new AfD. --Myles Long 22:40, 2 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Having an article makes him feel good and it doesn't do anyone any harm.  If he had complained about having one I would have voted to delete.  Steve Dufour 17:53, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment That's ... not really the basis on which we decide AfDs.  The feelings of the subject are almost wholly irrelevant to whether they have an article or not. -- Antaeus Feldspar 07:55, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I have noticed many articles where the person or the fans of the person are the only ones who think he/she is notable. Steve Dufour 13:56, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep If he was the first to coin the word "sporgery", there is no reason why he shouldn't be here.Yandman 10:05, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep His own feelings on the article are irrelevant, as are comparisons to other marginally related examples, but the article seems to establish notability. Robertissimo 11:04, 4 September 2006 (UTC)


 * keep He is well known as a scientology-critic person. Redecke 11:17, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment But where is the proof of his notability? I think he is promoting himself to be someone who is is not. Who says he is notable? Antaeus Feldspar claimed the Johnny Lee Clary wasn't notable enough even after being on Oprah, Donahue, and about 10 other major TV show major newspapers etc. Johnny scrapped in on notability so I straight away thought that this guy doesn't stand a chance! Potters house 12:53, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Nick, I would be surprised if you could provide any evidence of your accusations that Tilman is "promoting himself to be someone who is is not [sic]".  In fact, I would be highly surprised if you could provide evidence that Tilman is promoting himself at all.  This is in stark contrast to Johnny Lee Clary, who if I'm not mistaken created the original article on himself and (quite obviously) has been the recipient of heavy promotional efforts since.  Johnny Lee Clary is not the first aggressive self-promoter we've dealt with.  He isn't the first to try and demand his own article that reads like a press release; he isn't the first to interfere with the AfD on his article by erasing other people's words, and he surely wouldn't be the first self-promoter on Wikipedia to exaggerate modest indicators of notability and describe them as if they were proof (i.e., to use a notable example that I'm sure sticks in many Wikipedians' minds, "featured in the New York Times" turning out to mean "mentioned as an example in a single New York Times op-ed piece".)  Clary may choose to make paranoid allegations about neo-Nazis on Wikipedia trying to oppress him (and you've chosen to go along with him) but in reality he has himself to blame.  When Clary has shows that he has no moral scruples against making vicious, slanderous accusations against people who disagree with him, and shows that he has no moral scruples against tampering with a discussion to try and force it to come out his way, no one is going to take vague claims like 'he appeared on Oprah, at some point, and on Donahue, at some point, and that's proof that he's notable' at face value. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Administrators? Can we close this discussion?  I think the nominator has made it clear that this AfD is not about the merits of the article under discussion but about punishing anyone who doesn't agree with the nominator about Johnny Lee Clary. -- Antaeus Feldspar 17:11, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Tilman is self promoting http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Tilman_Hausherr&dir=prev&action=history and also clary has notability. He is the head director of Operation Colorblind, has appeared on Billy Graham's Radio show, Geraldo Rivera, Sally Jessy Raphael, Jerry Springer, Rikki Lake, Queen Latifah, Carol and Marilyn Real Friends, Montel Williams, Phil Donahue, A&E Investigative Reports, ABC World News Tonight, Bertrice Berry, Rolanda, The Today Show, A Current Affair, NBC's Donny Deutsch The Big Idea, and The 700 Club, TBN's Praise The Lord show, many national and international Newspapers and National TV Shows in Australia, England, Holland, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Sweden, and Wales. He has appeared all over the Nation of Australia on ABC Radio as well as ABC's "Enough Rope" hosted by Andrew Denton also appeared with the Australian KKK leader on the Today show in Australia. What has Tilman got? Nothing. He is not notable. Also this deletion is warrented. How come one person JLC can be nominated for deletion by you Antaeus Feldspar but if your best friend Timan is nominated on the same grounds it is unwarrented? Pleae PROVE his notability or delete this article. Potters house 22:42, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * sigh You know, it's really not necessary to copy and paste the entire laundry list of everyone who has ever purportedly deemed Clary worthy of attention every time the subject comes up.  We've heard it all before and strangely enough, we don't really need to see it again on an article that has nothing to do with Johnny Lee Clary.  As for whether this article was nominated on "the same grounds", that's obviously untrue:  this is the only article on Wikipedia about Tilman Hausherr, unlike Johnny Lee Clary who had his article Johnny Lee Clary nominated because it was redundant with the already-existing Johnny Angel (wrestler) article. -- Antaeus Feldspar 23:21, 4 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Forget clary then and just provide some proof that Tilman is notable. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vanity_page Please PROVE IT! Remember this is not a vote page but a dicussion about whether he is notable or not. I see no proof whatsoever! Please stick to the subject at hand. IS HE NOTABLE if so PROVE IT. Potters house 09:34, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * You know what? I'm not going to bother answering that.  I'm just going to let the absurdity of you, of all people, suddenly issuing a command to "stick to the subject at hand", hang in the air. -- Antaeus Feldspar 12:30, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't get all emotional about it. You won't answer because you CAN'T. Like Harry said below "He is just a little computer guy in Germany obsessed with with celebrities and hatred against minority religions." If not PROVE otherwise. Potters house 14:13, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * delete Tilman Hausherr is a nobody. He is just a little computer guy in Germany obsessed with with celebrities and hatred against minority religions. If Wikipedia portrays such people, it loses credibility. Hausherr is a bore. If you give him a Wikipedia page, you have to give one to thousand other Usenet loons too. Harry Turner 6:57 — HarryTurner (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Speedy keep. This is a transparently bad faith nomination.  The previous debate closed as a consensus keep, and the only people in favor of deletion are single purposed accounts with less than 10 edits.  RFerreira 18:35, 5 September 2006 (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.