Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Geometry guy (talk | contribs) at 23:28, 31 March 2012 (Compromise: discussion remains blanked, but provide show/hide for closing remarks). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

]

This discussion has been hidden from view but can still be accessed by following the "history" link at the top of the page. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

• Is the individual relatively unknown and a non-public figure? Although my personal viewpoint is that the individual is relatively unknown, I see no consensus in the discussions here that show editors agreeing that this individual is so, or that he is a non-public figure. While some argue that choosing a radio presenter's profession should not be an automatic reason to be considered a public figure, others argue that that exactly is the case, especially when one is a BBC presenter for whom being a public figure is a self-chosen part of the job. Therefore, I see no way in which one could apply BIODEL here unless consensus emerges that the individual is a non-public figure.
• Is there consensus here to delete this BLP? Leave the fringe and emotive comments, the delete !voters bring out issues with unreliable sourcing, notability worthiness of the award won by the BLP, marginal notability of the individual himself, being humane about respecting an individual's request to not have one's biography (or attack/puffery/nonsense information) on the project, applying IAR per se out here and creation of new deletion policies (which allow marginally notable people to have their BLPs deleted on request), The keep !voters bring forward some of the same issues with differing perspectives - that the BLP meets the notability criteria at WP:BIO, the BLP is not an attack page (anymore), the DoB/content issue is one that should be handled otherwise (full protection as a start) but not through deletion, award(s) won by the BLP qualify the individual on Entertainer, and that notable personalities should not have the discretion to request deletion of their BLPs because they dislike it.

If it were just a numerial summary, then there are 40 odd keep !votes compared to 30 odd delete !votes. But then, it's not just about the numbers here. Although I personally completely agree with the delete !voters and am appalled that individuals who get harrassed due to their Misplaced Pages BLP are not able to get the same removed, there's strong policy support for the keep !votes here. Disappointing as it is, there is less or absent policy on our project that supports requests from borderline notable personalities to delete their biographies when the same may not contain attack or defamatory information. In this regard, I have to close this AfD as Keep.

• What is the way forward for this BLP subject? One way forward could be editors like SlimVirgin, Dweller, DGG, Youreallycan etc working towards creating an addition to BIODEL or to BLPDEL that confirms that marginally notable people, irrespective of whether their BLP is an attack page or not, may request successfully the removal of their BLP from our project. The second clearly is the Foundation immediately taking office action in case they feel that this case needs to be viewed with leniency. I'll personally prefer that as of immediately.

Again, my personal viewpoint due to various reasons would have been to delete this BLP, if not for anything else but for the massive pain this project ends up committing on some living people who really would wish otherwise. Irrespective of that, a keep is the decision here. Thanks and regards. Wifione 10:45, 30 March 2012 (UTC)