Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion/User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard

moved from Afd
Please respond to the reason for not supporting the Afd. Instead of attacking indivual editors, in violation of WP:NPA. Travb (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Comments moved:

Comment Good job on violating AGF there. Oddly enough Travb finds himself here because he monitors articles I am involved with, hence his appearance on other articles that appear on that noticeboard, quite ironic, this includes the Clinton Chronicles which he is complaining about, more on that below and the irony. --Nuclear Zer0 11:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

I would like to point out that if you follow people who follow that noticeboard you would see the following votes on Clinton_Chronicles: There was 6 other keep votes as well, so apparently its obvious that people who follow this board do not vote in step and further that if Travb is alleging that, then he is actualyl guilty of participating in vote stacking as he voted in the same manner as others in that article and monitors that noticeboard. I would liek to also alert Travb to the fact that the article he is complaining about, Clinton_Chronicles was added by the nominator, one who accused of vandalizing the noticeboard two days prior and was blocked for it. And that you voted in line as shown above with most of the people on the noticeboard, are you stating you participated in votestacking? --Nuclear Zer0 11:43, 30 October 2006 (UTC) Nominator has a history of blocks relating to this board and vandalism, as pointed out above please see User:NBGPWS, I guess when you cannot vandalize it anymore you look for someone to delete it instead. This is clearly a WP:POINT violation as the paragraph listed above doesn't point to a rationale and the user has been told the noticeboard acts as all noticeboards related to a small group of articles, such as conspiracy based ones. --Nuclear Zer0 11:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Aaron - Keep
 * Crockspot - Merge
 * Jinxmchue - Keep
 * Myself - Keep
 * Travb - Keep
 * Edison - Delete
 * Derex - Keep (one who wrote the above, but voted in same favor.
 * Strothra - Delete
 * Comment The nominator has been blocked just last week over vandalizing the board he is now attempting to get deleted, you can see his block log under User:NBGPWS the specific block is at:, he has been told so far by another admin that the page is permissable as all AfD groups that cover a specific area, cartoons, war articles, Guantanamo Bay prisoners etc. --Nuclear Zer0 11:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - Travb has removed my comments, this AfD accuses people of votestacking, therefore you cannot ask me to comment no the article, when the whole AfD is about the people. Further do not delete peoples comments from AfD pages, its vandalism


 * Comment to closer - This appears to be a duplicate MfD of this one, so please either speedy close this one, or check both pages when considering arguements. Crockspot 16:45, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This is the talk page for that, a user moved my comments here and I moved them back, leaving these here. --Nuclear Zer0 16:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Just figured that out. Nevermind. Crockspot 16:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

One particular case with documentation
"Wikipedia:Articles for deletes/Kathleen Christison - wife of William Christison, with 1/5th the notability!" Nominated by board member Aaron - 12 Oct 2006 Kathleen Christianson

She's an author, lecturer, ex CIA Analyst (16 yrs) and a vocal critic of Israel and the US's support of Israel. She wrote several books. Even I (admittedly a progressive liberal) don't agree with many of her views, and find some of them objectionable. Non-notable?  89,500 GHITS for "Kathleen Christison" + CIA. Numerous inclusionable third-party mentions.

PROD for AFD by Aaron (board member) Delete by GabrialF (board founder and member) - I created the page but labeling me a board member is misleading GabrielF 13:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC) Delete by Eusubias (status undetermined) Delete by Crockspot (board member) comment - Don't label me again - Crockspot 13:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC) Delete by Morton Devonshire (board member) Delete by Nuclear0 (board member) comment - I would also prefer not to be labeled --Nuclear Zer0 13:15, 31 October 2006 (UTC)  Delete by Sloane (board member) Delete by Jersey Devil (status undetermined) Neutral by Blainster (Status undeterimed)

do we have catered meals at board meetings? --Nuclear Zer0 03:46, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll bring it up with my Illuminati masters. They're all Rothschilds and De Beers' so I think they can spring for it.GabrielF 05:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Kathleen Christison AfD discussion


 * Please see WP:No personal attacks. The only "boards" I belong to on Wikipedia are Wikipedians who play computer and video games, WikiProject Computer and video games members, and Wikipedians interested in anime and manga.  That's it.  Is this some kind of personal attack?  Morton devonshire 03:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * That's light years away from bing a personal attack. You have dozens of posts to the board, and answered Derex, on that board, using 'us' and 'we'. "If you notice the Afds, you will see that each of us..." "Notice that we're NOT nominating articles..." Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Result was delete for an admittedly controverisal woman whose views many people find objectionable. But non-notable? Google her yourself and tell me that. I contend that this vote was PURE POLITICS, and AT LEAST 7 of the 10 votes, AND the PROD came from board members. Kathleen Christianson + CIA

Fairness And Accuracy For All 00:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Um, given that she pretty clearly fails WP:BIO, this is less than persuasive. Is this the worst example you can construct? JoshuaZ 01:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Fails BIO? Kathleen Christison in WAPO --Christison's publications on Amazon -- Kathleen Christianson + CIA Fairness And Accuracy For All 02:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * If she's so inherently notable, how come nobody challenged the AfD? GabrielF 02:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I'll let the admins judge if it was a good faith nomination, or agenda driven. Did you post an RFC to get feedback from the HUNDREDS of Wikipedians who are primarily interested in Israel-Palestine issues? - Oops, I was wrong - she has 3 books and 5 other published works available on Amazon. Christison's publications on Amazon Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Its not a WAPO article, its a question and answer session. I am sure if you called Washington Post you would most likely find its a seperate group that handles the content of an online Q&A then handles choosing articles for the website. I also do not see her mentioned in many sources for views, so you can write to your hearts content, but if noone cares ... well your still not notable. I wold also like to note as Gabriel said, if she is, and her views, so notable, why did noone oppose? Better yet how much of that information was in the article? I will tell you, none of it. You can view the cache on google if you know how to search for it. You should research your examples better as they arent working out too well so far. You also turned this MfD into a mess. --Nuclear Zer0 03:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

I'll let the admins decide 'what's working'. I contend that even the initial argument was bad faith.

"NN. Only real assertion of notability is from her book, which gets only 150 Ghits [1] [2], practically all of which are blogs. Aaron 02:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)"

She's written 3 books, yet the nominator used the title of one. Why might that be? Most of her notability is from being a 16 year CIA officer with 'radical' views, and is why she gets 89,500 GHITS on her name + CIA. She lectures all over the world, and has a published history dating back a decade. Kathleen Christison + CIA Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:54, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Sorry but radical CIA officer doesnt satisfy WP:BIO, but thats another issue. The Learning Annex is having a convention with "Power Earner Guru's" giving speeches, people who give them all over the continental US ... do I really need to finish, should we give them all articles? Again the article did not establish notability, if you felt it did, you should have chimed in. You can see the link I provided above and review if you feel the article presented notability. --Nuclear Zer0 03:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Here's her WAPO BIO from 2001, and she has become even more notable since then. "Formerly, Christison worked as a political analyst with the CIA, dealing first with Vietnam for several years and then with the Middle East for her last seven years with the Agency before resigning in 1979. Since leaving the CIA, she has been a free-lance writer, dealing primarily with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her book, "Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on U.S. Middle East Policy," was published in 1999 by the University of California Press, and was reissued in paperback with an update in October 2001. A second book, "The Wound of Dispossession: Telling the Palestinian Story," was published in August 2001. She has published articles in Foreign Policy magazine, the Christian Science Monitor, two encyclopedias on the Middle East, and several Middle East journals, as well as book reviews in newspapers throughout the country, including the Washington Post." Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Its not a WAPO bio its a description before the Q&A. Lets not try to prop that up to more then it is. --Nuclear Zer0 11:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That's for the admins to decide. Kathleen Christison publications available from the University College of Cork, Ireland Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * PS you may want to remove your list above, its starting to seem McCarthy like. --Nuclear Zer0 03:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * That's YOUR list, not mine. Conspiracy Board's ≈Votes on Christison AfD Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I mean the one you tagging people as board members. Stop trying to label people. I think Derex made a comment that when you run out of points to argue you start talking about the people ... hmm ... --Nuclear Zer0 11:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * All anyone has to do is look at the page's history, and they'll come up with the exact same list as mine. I encourage the admins to do so. Fairness And Accuracy For All 19:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

'''Here is the Kathleen Chistison AfD reposted in full. (do not remove)'''

"Wikipedia:Articles for deletes/Kathleen Christison - wife of William Christison, with 1/5th the notability!" Nominated by board member Aaron - 12 Oct 2006 Kathleen Christianson

NN. Only real assertion of notability is from her book, which gets only 150 Ghits, practically all of which are blogs. Aaron 02:18, 12 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete She's written a book and some articles that have been picked up in leftist and Arab publications some of which are notable. If she were writing about just about any topic other than the Israeli-Palestinian conflict she would easily fail notability guidelines. She gets some pretty big google numbers but I think that has more to do with the topic she's writing about than what she has to say. However, if we adapt the academic notability test and consider all of the people who regularly write about this issue she is certainly not more notable than the average person writing about the topic. GabrielF 02:42, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Non notable author, spook. Eusebeus 15:09, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. - Crockspot 16:34, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete this is more of a 'Duh'-lete as it's pretty obvious. --Tbeatty 00:25, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Endless reserves of conspiracy cruft advocacy stuff out there I guess.  Violates WP:BALLS, WP:SNOWBALL, and Vanispamcruftisement. GiveMeAF___ingBreak!  Morton devonshire 02:16, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete--Sloane 02:58, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, not notable to warrant article. --NuclearZer0 12:33, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete notability not established.--Jersey Devil 04:32, 15 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Are you kidding? There were very few (less than 200) CIA case officers worldwide during her tenure. That alone makes her story notable.  Her political position is not what makes her notable. --Blainster 21:27, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Change to Neutral Oops, found out the Christisons were analysts, of which there are many, not case officers. --Blainster 21:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

Kathleen Christison AfD - I hope that's better for you editors who are listed -- Fairness And Accuracy For All 18:30, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
 * It seems the more outrageous your conspiracy theory grows the more people who look at this MfD as something more then a simply MfD. You may want to consider toning down you approach. --Nuclear Zer0 19:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * It doesn't suprise me in the least that a member of the Conspiracy Theory board sees an effort to document their actions as a Conspiracy Theory! Do I need to be afraid of the 'New World Order', too? Fairness And Accuracy For All 19:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I am not really sure what you are refering to at this point. You keep attempting to prove there is a conspiracy here to delete articles ... However it seems you will not be taking my advice and instead be going further off on a tangent. --Nuclear Zer0 19:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Using this MfD as an excuse for a witch hunt seems to me to be a misuse of the process.--Rosicrucian 20:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

Morton Devoshire has now recreated the board in his user space
Morton Devonshire has now recreated this board in his user space. He is the second board member to have done so.

Conspiracy Noticeboard The Morton Devoshire edition

I request that this page, and the other mirror be speedy deleted immediately until this issue is settled.

Fairness And Accuracy For All 20:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Request denied. Guy 22:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)