Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:04, 17 November 2009

Laura DiDio

Laura DiDio (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a classic coatrack article. The real subject of this article isn't Laura DiDio, it's the SCO-Linux controversies. Hey! Look! We already have an article on that. Laura DiDio doesn't meet our notability guidelines because there are not reliable, third-party sources in which she is the subject of coverage. Incidentally, according to the talk page, this article was initially titled Didiot, and that remained a redirect until 2009. We shouldn't be covering, let alone repeating, non-notable nasty names from blogs and Slashdot. This article is a disgrace and an embarrassment to Misplaced Pages. *** Crotalus *** 18:33, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. Non-notable person at the fringe of notable events/controversy. --SquidSK 18:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, obvious WP:COATRACK indeed. JBsupreme (talk) 23:21, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
• Keep. A lot of Open Source supporters would like to erase her existence. But this doesn't mean she isn't notable, and, if we're going to get rid of DiDio, perhaps PJ should go too? Put aside your bias, vote to keep based on notability. =//= Proxy User (talk) 08:17, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment. I have redacted the vicious personal attacks made earlier by Proxy User. Thank you for since refactoring. JBsupreme (talk) 14:57, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Comment. The above comment is a totally unnecessary personal attack that has no relevancy to this discussion at all. I understand you disagree with me, but how about keeping it "on topic"? Proxy User (talk) 00:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
      • Reply. For the record, you originally wrote some seriously heinous shit that need not be repeated. These are your own words, and they are the only attacks made herein. The closing administrator should take note of this and weigh your !vote accordingly, perhaps you have an ulterior motive here. What you wrote is easily cause for a block should it ever continue. JBsupreme (talk) 08:41, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
      • Comment - The only unnecessary attack was the comment you made, PU. What you said was a serious violation of WP:BLP, and therefore, is strictly prohibited. Secondly, calling JB's edits vandalism is also not allowed, given your edit violated BLP, it was not vandalism to refactor it. You made a very wise choice refactoring it, otherwise you likely wouldn't be able to edit any other page but your talk.— Dædαlus 10:13, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete; the article reads more as a Mesian version of another article. -Jeremy 08:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I agree with you. JBsupreme (talk) 09:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete - get your coat love, you've pulled. GiantSnowman 15:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per JB and Jeremy. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 16:04, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Biographical)
• AfD debates