| Revision as of 04:06, 26 December 2005 editJJay (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users8,366 edits →[]← Previous edit | Revision as of 04:29, 26 December 2005 edit undoThesquire (talk | contribs)1,993 edits →[]Next edit → | ||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
| Who? What? , mostly related to some webdesign mailing lists. Non-notable/vanity. ] 00:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | Who? What? , mostly related to some webdesign mailing lists. Non-notable/vanity. ] 00:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| * '''Strong keep'''. This guy was a pathbreaker well before Drudge and is a figure in the internet revolution. Suggest the nom read the NY Times profile from 1996. Vanity? Sounds more like jealousy to me. -- ] 02:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | * '''Strong keep'''. This guy was a pathbreaker well before Drudge and is a figure in the internet revolution. Suggest the nom read the NY Times profile from 1996. Vanity? Sounds more like jealousy to me. -- ] 02:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| :'''Comment''' - If it's jealousy on Timecop's part, why is someone breaking 3RR to plop this tripe into the ] article? Reeks of vanity to me. ] 04:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Delete''', 130 unique Google hits. I looked up the NYT article but you have to pay for it, but if this guy were so important, there would be more than one article in all of NYT for the last 20 years. Attacking the nominator is never appropriate. And if this article is kept, it needs a complete rewrite. ]|] 02:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | *'''Delete''', 130 unique Google hits. I looked up the NYT article but you have to pay for it, but if this guy were so important, there would be more than one article in all of NYT for the last 20 years. Attacking the nominator is never appropriate. And if this article is kept, it needs a complete rewrite. ]|] 02:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Delete''' and never recreate -- ] 03:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | *'''Delete''' and never recreate -- ] 03:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 04:29, 26 December 2005
Vigdor Schreibman
Who? What? 9000 google hits, mostly related to some webdesign mailing lists. Non-notable/vanity. Timecop 00:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Strong keep. This guy was a pathbreaker well before Drudge and is a figure in the internet revolution. Suggest the nom read the NY Times profile from 1996. Vanity? Sounds more like jealousy to me. -- JJay 02:36, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Comment - If it's jealousy on Timecop's part, why is someone breaking 3RR to plop this tripe into the Blog article? Reeks of vanity to me. Thesquire 04:29, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, 130 unique Google hits. I looked up the NYT article but you have to pay for it, but if this guy were so important, there would be more than one article in all of NYT for the last 20 years. Attacking the nominator is never appropriate. And if this article is kept, it needs a complete rewrite. User:Zoe| 02:49, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete and never recreate -- Femmina 03:22, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per JJay. Notable for first blog (even if individual blogs aren't notable). Endomion 03:45, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Unverifiable, unencyclopedic. The article author is also violating 3RR trying to paste that whole thing into Blog. Flyboy Will 03:46, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- It more or less all checks out based on the references I dug up. -- JJay 04:06, 26 December 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. Agreed it is a bad article but the content needs stay. Clean-up recommended. SorryGuy 03:48, 26 December 2005 (UTC)