Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Christian Plural Marriage


 * The following discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Self-interest spammers?
Except for a couple users, most of the "KEEP" votes look like they are coming from a small yahoo group. The Yahoo search for that group shows that it does not even have 400 members. For an open list, that is not much.

At Wikipedia, the Christian_Plural_Marriage page was first created by User:Docburkhart, with these first posts. On the yahoo group, User:Docburkhart has been rallying people to promote their list, as in this example.

In one of the the original edits, the very first link reference that User:Docburkhart links to is biblicalfamilies.org. The whois for that site says it was only started this year in January. Posting that very new site first on very new page at Wikipedia looks like a self-interest spam by User:Docburkhart.

User:JohnBoyTheGreat joined the rally call making a couple posts  and voting to "KEEP." On their yahoo group, it looks like he is the owner of that group, making this post on his group.  His past edits at Wikipedia look like they confirm this. In one edit, he moved his yahoo group to the top of the list of links. In another edit, he promoted his yahoo group's name.

Another user voting to "KEEP" is User:Cnystrom, with these contributions. Going by the name, chris_nystrom, that same person posted on that same yahoo group what they were doing on Wikipedia.

Another user voting to "KEEP" is User:RosalynD. That person's contributions first started with this Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Christian_Plural_Marriage and then only with this the Christian_Plural_Marriage page.

Maybe Christian_polygamy might be a better title to re-name this page if it is to be kept. However, most of the users who are trying to create this page and "KEEP" it instead seem to be a small self-interest yahoo group. Hareydog (talk) 18:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I do not think it is terribly surprising as most of us mentioned above are interested in the topic and have joined the mailing list. I think if you read the article itself: 1. It has merit on its own. 2. It is not an advert for the mailing list.


 * Lastly it was not a secret conspiracy. The mailing list was a reference from day 1. User: Cnystrom - July 8, 2008


 * In the interests of fairness, Hareydog, all input can be traced on Wikipedia and on the messages on our group; I added input later, after the creator of this Wikipedia entry started it, at his request. Most of the users that have contributed have all come from this one group, because we all hold a common view on this subject, and were requested to contribute to expand the article.


 * My posts in the talk section only note that I feel it is a legitimate article, and that a reasonable amount of time was needed to cleanup the article because of the holiday weekend.


 * If you care to view the messages in the ChristianPolygamy2 Yahoo Group, you will see that I have consistently been the voice of neutrality for this Wikipedia article. I don't want to see it become a self-interest entry any more than you do.


 * As for the inclusion of the Yahoo group of which I happen to be moderator, I didn't add that link (which can easily be checked), nor did I suggest it (which is more difficult to check, but I hope you are willing to accept my basic claim of honesty as I am yours).


 * The name change in the edit you mentioned was an appropriate explanatory edit. You are looking for conspiracy where there is none.


 * Speaking of conspiracy, according to your user profile, Hareydog, you've only started editing since July 7th, 2008, and all in opposition to Christian plural marriage. Perhaps YOUR motives are suspect?


 * By the way, who better to offer information for a subject than those that know most about it? JohnBoyTheGreat (talk) 06:18, 11 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.