This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New VFD initiated June 24, 2005. Someone has added back all of the non-notable content which was deleted in the previous VFD round. This is more evidence that this page is the work of one author and is of little or no use to the Wikicommunity. Perhaps this material belongs on a Wikipedia user page instead of an article. Tanstaafl 22:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
from VfD:
This page is completely non-notable. There is no reason why this subject should have a page longer than Ronald Reagan's. If this page is to be kept, it should be one short paragraph. Tanstaafl 00:13, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
end moved discussion
Indrian says doesn't deserve encyclopedia entry, but this guy is in three other encyclopedias besides Wikipedia, one of the Star Trek encyclopedias, The Science Fiction Encyclopedia by John Clute & Peter Nicholls and has an entry in Contemporary Authors. Keep on keepin' on dude!
Mallett may not be a Stephen King or Arthur C. Clarke yet, but he has a small, rabid group of fans that are excited about his work (co-wrote the storyline for a Star Trek: The Next Generation two-part episode, short story in one of the Star Wars anthologies) and he's going to be famous someday. They obviously love his work and support him. It sounds like a few jealous losers that don't want him to have an entry. If Ronald Reagan's article is so short, maybe they should go add to it! Isn't the point of an encyclopedia to have as much information as possible on a subject? Geez. I agree with the above post. Keep up the good work, Mallett! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davrob45 ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
What is TANSTAAFL's problem with this guy? He seems to come here quite a bit and snip away at the article, posts VFDs and generally seems to dislike this author. I think it's great that there's people out there like this author who work hard and want to be remembered. Hope I can do something like that someday.
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page. |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New VFD initiated June 24, 2005. Someone has added back all of the non-notable content which was deleted in the previous VFD round. This is more evidence that this page is the work of one author and is of little or no use to the Wikicommunity. Perhaps this material belongs on a Wikipedia user page instead of an article. Tanstaafl 22:48, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
from VfD:
This page is completely non-notable. There is no reason why this subject should have a page longer than Ronald Reagan's. If this page is to be kept, it should be one short paragraph. Tanstaafl 00:13, 4 Dec 2004 (UTC)
end moved discussion
Indrian says doesn't deserve encyclopedia entry, but this guy is in three other encyclopedias besides Wikipedia, one of the Star Trek encyclopedias, The Science Fiction Encyclopedia by John Clute & Peter Nicholls and has an entry in Contemporary Authors. Keep on keepin' on dude!
Mallett may not be a Stephen King or Arthur C. Clarke yet, but he has a small, rabid group of fans that are excited about his work (co-wrote the storyline for a Star Trek: The Next Generation two-part episode, short story in one of the Star Wars anthologies) and he's going to be famous someday. They obviously love his work and support him. It sounds like a few jealous losers that don't want him to have an entry. If Ronald Reagan's article is so short, maybe they should go add to it! Isn't the point of an encyclopedia to have as much information as possible on a subject? Geez. I agree with the above post. Keep up the good work, Mallett! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Davrob45 ( talk • contribs) 18:31, 25 September 2008 (UTC)
What is TANSTAAFL's problem with this guy? He seems to come here quite a bit and snip away at the article, posts VFDs and generally seems to dislike this author. I think it's great that there's people out there like this author who work hard and want to be remembered. Hope I can do something like that someday.