Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Middleton family (2nd nomination)

(Moved to here as this is veering off topic now, cake discussion included)


 * Well, the James Middleton article just spent four hours on the Main Page with a DYK hook about Jame's Hello! cake job, supported by a reference to a Daily Mail "story" with the headline "How many MORE skeletons in Kate Middleton's closet?". I think that proves my point. Crap articles on non-notable people are always going to attract clueless people who think that citing that sort of fact to that sort of source is remotely acceptable for a BLP. MickMacNee (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Infact, holy shit, it was you who nommed it to DYK, and that piece of crap source was what was supporting the fact you chose when you did so! And you're claiming to be sticking up for BLP in here? Unbeleivable. MickMacNee (talk) 00:52, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Please keep comments related to content, not contributors please. Bob talk 00:56, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No I will not. This user is citing a concern for BLPs in this Afd, while being the primary source of a massive great BLP violation on the James Middleton article, due to the fact that despite his claims in that Afd, it seems expecting coverage of a subject to be reliable, let alone in depth, which he insisted did exist, and asserted it would be disruption and a violation of core policy to claim otherwise, is an impossible task, even in situations where he wants to display that sort of content on the Main Page as some of our best work. 6 hours that garbage was on the Main Page. 6 goddam hours. So no, you know what you can do with 'comment on content' in this case frankly. MickMacNee (talk) 01:45, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh come on, he was cooking cupcakes - a great model for young adult males to cook everywhere (maybe rather than sitting on their proverbials in front of a computer screen...) Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * There was terrible, terrible damage done to wikipedia! A cake baking male for "6 goddam hours" is as good a reason for behaving disruptive and getting personal as any. We should write a new policy: "If Mick has made his point noone is allowed to express any other opinion." Punishment for doing otherwise: Dozens of longish repetitive rants from Mick including some "holy shits", "goddams" and, of course several "f***s". Have a nice day, Adornix (talk) 11:01, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * I wonder if the cakes got burnt...six hours is a long time in the oven....Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:38, 14 May 2011 (UTC)
 * No amount of jokes and sarcasm can make up for the fact that you don't seem to realise what the actual issue is with posting a DTK linked to that garbage of a reference on the Main Page for 6 hours. You want to be able to express your opinion and have it count? Read WP:BLP, figure it out, and get a clue. MickMacNee (talk) 13:13, 14 May 2011 (UTC)