Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Thomas Lessman

Foul Play?
At least one of the people requesting deletion, Hackney, seems to have a personal vendetta going on with this deletion request. On his own talk page, in a discussion with Flamarande, he notes that if I hadn't been determined to keep the section about my work on Wikipedia history articles, he wouldn't have nominated the article for AFD.

The article has been up for two years, and there hasn't been a problem until now? Seems a little fishy to me... Thomas Lessman (talk) 03:25, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Either that, or I didn't notice the article till today. That'll teach you not to draw attention to yourself won't it? One Night In Hackney  303  03:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * And if Hackney hadn't nominated it, I would have. And I came past the article as a result of the discussion about your behaviour on the admin noticeboard. Spartaz Humbug! 09:12, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
 * ditto. KillerChihuahua?!? 14:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, SqueakBox 16:56, 26 January 2008 (UTC) struck comment, the 66 ip just reappeared and they are not that similar in location. Thanks, SqueakBox 17:07, 26 January 2008 (UTC)

Wiki-Bullying and Stalking
There is absolutely NO reason any of you should be deleting ANYone's comments. Especially if it is a wikipedian that you have a history of harassing them and removing their edits! I don't know who "Rex Judicata" or 66.whatever, or CIA1234whatever are, but I do know who AGWiii is, and he's a Professor at a University. I've known him for years. I've seen the work of certain pro-Deleters here in hounding AGWiii and the other usernames that have had their comments deleted. Whether you liked their comments or not, deleting them or censoring comments you don't like definitely implicate the deleters in a conflict of interests of their own. Especially when you stalk those users everywhere they go on Wikipedia, bullying them and deleting their comments and legitimate contributions.

Their arguments illustrated their belief, similar to mine, that many of the people arguing FOR deletion are doing so, not because of the merits of the article, but because they don't like the subject matter or they don't like the editors who created or contributed to the article. A good case in point is the editor who insists this is only a "vanity article", and has vehemently demanded it be deleted, even going as far as trying to sabatoge efforts to improve the article so that it meets the criteria to keep. Thomas Lessman (talk) 22:17, 26 January 2008 (UTC)