Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/James Bodenstedt

The information contained looks factual. I do not see copyrighted content. I do not see slanderous comments. I do not see factual inaccuracies. James Bodenstedt has a right to his opinion and views. He can contribute to causes he believes in and wants to support. That said, every other member of society has those same rights. I have financially supported Wikipedia for years, and I do so because I believe that information wants to be shared and it should be available to all who seek it. It is essential to continue to provide open, unbiased, and factual information, regardless of a person's desire to seek obscurity, when they themselves have sought public recognition and exposure at the highest levels socially and politically.

James Bodenstedt and MUY! Companies are uncomfortable. James Bodenstedt's public actions have drawn public scrutiny. Every Wikipedia reader has a right to choose where they shop, and to decide how they want to spend their money. Would Wikipedia be considering the deletion of this content had James Bodenstedt donated $440,000 to justice reform or "March For Our Lives"? James Bodenstedt chose to support a highly polarizing figure, who in many people views shouldn't be in the role they occupy because of their actions and views. Today's events are historically important, and if the information presented here in the pages of Wikipedia does not reflect this moment in history, I am at a loss for what should be here and why Wikipedia exists. So long as the information is factual, accurate, non-slanderous, a representation of historical relevance, and not in violation of copyright, the request for deletion should be denied.Mstidston (talk) 11:59, 5 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Yes, we would delete that article, per WP:1E. Politics has nothing to do with the policies that are followed, and being factual, accurate, non-slanderous etc. does not mean that an article on James meets the notability criteria. Jerod Lycett (talk) 13:12, 5 June 2020 (UTC)