And the creator of a lousy advert on wikipedia...
Edited to add information about secret service investigation, removal of 'looking for work' SHould be okay now - Idiotfromia
This really needs NPOVing now that his fan club have been told to stop it. Secretlondon 18:55, Nov 30, 2003 (UTC)
Wik, this page contains incorrect information and the subject of the article has asked that it be removed. Everyone on VfD says to redirect it anyway - what is the problem?
Angela 20:50, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Since when can subjects of articles demand their removal? And if I'm not mistaken things on VfD have to stay there for 5 days, you can't prejudge the final decision just because the votes are unanimous after 2 days. Others might still vote to keep the article. -- Wik 21:02, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)
Oh for chrissakes it's stuff like this that gives Wikipedia a bad name and takes all the fun out of it. Just let the freakin' page be redirected. You all need to get a sense of perspective about this... Wikipedia rules are not the Constitution and occasionally, exceptions need to be allowed. Sheesh. Marteau 21:16, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Exceptions can be allowed if there's a good reason, which I don't see in this case. -- Wik 21:37, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)
The person which this page is about asking for it be removed is not a good reason? What would be agood reason then? The FBI asking for it? Wik, with your stubborness you only alienate more and more people about you. andy 21:42, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Please delete the page, protect a stub at the same location, and post a note that I said so, to keep anyone from giving you any grief about it.
If there's false information there, he could possibly bring some complaint about libel against whoever wrote it. But if he just doesn't like it, there's no "right to privacy as a private citizen" nor any prohibition against "unauthorized biography" that could possibly apply here.
Even so, we have no intention of allowing wikipedia to be used as a platform for annoying the poor man, of course.
--Jimbo
From VfD
And the creator of a lousy advert on wikipedia...
Edited to add information about secret service investigation, removal of 'looking for work' SHould be okay now - Idiotfromia
This really needs NPOVing now that his fan club have been told to stop it. Secretlondon 18:55, Nov 30, 2003 (UTC)
Wik, this page contains incorrect information and the subject of the article has asked that it be removed. Everyone on VfD says to redirect it anyway - what is the problem?
Angela 20:50, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Since when can subjects of articles demand their removal? And if I'm not mistaken things on VfD have to stay there for 5 days, you can't prejudge the final decision just because the votes are unanimous after 2 days. Others might still vote to keep the article. -- Wik 21:02, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)
Oh for chrissakes it's stuff like this that gives Wikipedia a bad name and takes all the fun out of it. Just let the freakin' page be redirected. You all need to get a sense of perspective about this... Wikipedia rules are not the Constitution and occasionally, exceptions need to be allowed. Sheesh. Marteau 21:16, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Exceptions can be allowed if there's a good reason, which I don't see in this case. -- Wik 21:37, Dec 1, 2003 (UTC)
The person which this page is about asking for it be removed is not a good reason? What would be agood reason then? The FBI asking for it? Wik, with your stubborness you only alienate more and more people about you. andy 21:42, 1 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Please delete the page, protect a stub at the same location, and post a note that I said so, to keep anyone from giving you any grief about it.
If there's false information there, he could possibly bring some complaint about libel against whoever wrote it. But if he just doesn't like it, there's no "right to privacy as a private citizen" nor any prohibition against "unauthorized biography" that could possibly apply here.
Even so, we have no intention of allowing wikipedia to be used as a platform for annoying the poor man, of course.
--Jimbo
From VfD