Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wynn Wagner III


 * 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. --ST47 Talk&middot;Desk 14:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Wynn Wagner III

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This appears to be a vanity page, created by the guy himself, who is in my opinion not-notable enough to earn a page in his own right. However I would redirect this page to his software Oliver Keenan 16:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect per nom. Lurker  (talk · contribs) 16:33, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article makes a number of claims that would contribute towards notability if verifiable, including his book (it ought to be possible to find reviews of it somewhere) and his work as a singer. I recognized his name when I saw it because I was a regular user of BBS systems when they were popular. --Eastmain 20:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Redirect . Weak Keep Wynn and his software was indeed very notable in the online community back in the late 80's and early 90's (I recognized his name as well), but Notability is about lasting notability, which does not seem to be the case here.  If you (Eastmain) feel differently, perhaps you could improve the article to the point that it could be kept?
 * The discussion has convinced me that it is possible to keep if improved.  Mrand  T-C 11:50, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 13:01, 12 July 2007 (UTC)
 * comment - User:Mrand, please tell me where "lasting" is used in WP:N, because I can't find it. I would like to find it, because I believe "lasting" should be a criterion of notability - but I don't see it. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 19:30, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:N points to WP:NOT, which states long-term historical notability of persons and events. To be completely honest, I would love to see the article kept purely from "interesting person in history" aspect, but I was under the impression that isn't what wikipedia is about.  Mrand  T-C 02:20, 16 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I had hoped this was policy, but haven't seen anyone really asserting "long-term" as a qualification for notability. I hope the impotance of that criterion can be upped here at Wikipedia, because we are getting pretty overloaded with pop-culture trivia (e.g. Chongalicious, which survived an AfD). AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 15:47, 16 July 2007 (UTC)


 * keep - the article is not sourced, but it does assert his notability. Tag for sources and verification seems the best idea; after all, if the guy really was a country singer, radio personality, BBS coder and Catholic bishop, that all seems to be worth a page on Wikipedia. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad 19:32, 15 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I've found enough pages to be convinced of the Opus and religious claims, though I did not find any evidence of the music claim. Notable enough, I think, though it's close to the line. If we keep it, note that he has authored one book and co-authored another, though a whois search reveals the publisher is probably him or a relative. Tualha (Talk) 02:22, 16 July 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.