Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Wapnick: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 23:51, 27 June 2006 editAndrew Parodi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,627 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit Revision as of 00:40, 28 June 2006 edit undoAndrew Parodi (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users6,627 editsmNo edit summaryNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
* '''Comment'''. Just to inform fellow editors: it appears that the nomination of this page by ] for deletion is a “bad faith” deletion attempt. ] has recently submitted deletion nominations for all of the following ]-related articles: ], ], ], ], ], ]. And in the article ], ] will not accept ANY websites as “verifiable” websites with regard to ACIM, including and , both of which are the official websites of California-based non-profit organizations. This editor's deletion attempts are merely personal bias masquerading as adherence to Misplaced Pages policy. -- ] 00:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
---- ----
===]=== ===]===
''Reason this article should be deleted:'' ''Reason this article should be deleted:''


'''This article has been determined to be noncompliant to ] as discussed in it's ] based on :''' '''] believes that this article has been determined to be noncompliant to ] as discussed in it's ] based on :'''


* ] - Articles may not contain any previously unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas that serves to advance a position. * ] - Articles may not contain any previously unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas that serves to advance a position.

Revision as of 00:40, 28 June 2006


Kenneth Wapnick

Reason this article should be deleted:

Ste4k believes that this article has been determined to be noncompliant to Misplaced Pages content policy as discussed in it's Analysis for Deletion based on :

  • WP:NOR - Articles may not contain any previously unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas that serves to advance a position.
  • WP:VER - Information on Misplaced Pages must be reliable. Facts, viewpoints, theories, and arguments may only be included in articles if they have already been published by reliable and reputable sources. Articles should cite these sources whenever possible. Any unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
  • WP:NPOV - This article is not written from the neutral point of view, and appears to hope to advertise the external links, rather than to use them as sources of information.
  • WP:NOT - Misplaced Pages is not a soapbox or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Misplaced Pages articles are not propaganda or advocacy of any kind.
  • WP:NOT - Misplaced Pages is not a place to publish original thoughts and analyses.

using guidelines:

  • WP:BIO - The subject of this article fails to meet criteria testing whether a person has sufficient external notice to ensure that they can be covered from a neutral point of view based on verifiable information from reliable sources, without straying into original research.

and serves only to further promote non-notable topics rather than to report what is notable. Ste4k 05:42, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

Comment Article is not vanity because it wasn't written by Kenneth Wapnick. Take a look at the page history and see who started this article. -- Andrew Parodi 18:58, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Yes, but it seems it was written by a close friend of his , so it does fall under WP:VANITY. Also, after looking through the page history, it looks like that the page was manually moved, thus someone should add the article to the cut and paste move repair holding pen --TBCTaLk?!? 21:17, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
Comment Just a little background here. The editor in question who started this article is not in any way a "close friend" of Kenneth Wapnick's. He is a "student" of A Course In Miracles (which means that he reads the book), as well as a "student" of Kenneth Wapnick's (which means he reads books by Kenneth Wapnick, books about ACIM interpretation). To my knowledge, the two men have never even met.
I agree that the current writing style of the article needs to be improved. But in my mind, that calls for editing, not deletion. -- Andrew Parodi 23:51, 27 June 2006 (UTC)