Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Brian Chase (Misplaced Pages hoaxer) - 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

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Pitchka (talk | contribs) at 15:07, 13 December 2005 (→Confused). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 15:07, 13 December 2005 by Pitchka (talk | contribs) (→Confused)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

Brian Chase (Misplaced Pages hoaxer)

Notability, Non-Encyclopedic, and do we really want to reward and encourage more activity like this by giving it additional notoriety. -- SusanLarson 16:16, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Template:Vfdvoting

Voting 1

Comment on the above vote. "Misplaced Pages is not an indiscriminate collection of information. News reports. Misplaced Pages should not offer first-hand news reports on breaking stories (however, our sister project Wikinews does exactly that). Misplaced Pages does have many encyclopedia articles on topics of historical significance that are currently in the news, and can be significantly more up-to-date than most reference sources since we can incorporate new developments and facts as they are made known. See current events for examples." and "Such a minor branch of a subject that it doesn't deserve an article" specifically -- SusanLarson 17:04, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
How can the guy who caused the whole thing be considered a minor branch of the subject? Soo 17:11, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
Because we have a pretty comprehensive article on the topic already and this is at the most a subsection of that. -- SusanLarson 17:17, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
  • User's fifth edit.

Voting 2

  • First edit.
  • 15th edit, only one to an article.
  • Keep. -- Perhaps this may be one day noted as the beginning of the end of a truly useful Misplaced Pages, when out of fear of hoaxing, user anonymity is sacrificed instead of finding a better solution to problems like this. It's the onus of the Misplaced Pages system to ensure the information is "maintained" as correct as possible, and the solution should not be to expose users (even abusers) like Chase. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.47.27.39 (talk • contribs) 18:58, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete ridiculous. there are hoaxes every day. what makes this guy more noteworthy than any other wikipedia troll? is anyone going to care about him in a year? i thought not. this is an encylopedia, not a blog. Derex 19:03, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment -- Oh? And how would that look to the mainstream if Misplaced Pages shoves this issue under the rug. Removing it would look like we are denying this event ever happened, out of embarassment. This information must be available; it's just a matter of where. See below for my suggestion to merge. --CoderGnome 19:23, 11 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment -- I don't think other Misplaced Pages trolls have had New York Times articles about them. *Dan T.* 19:51, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting 3

1. The story attracted significant attention from prestigious news sources.
2. People can become notable for a single destructive act.
3. He lost his job over the incident. That hardly encourages imitation.
4. If Misplaced Pages were not involved in the story I suspect we would vote to keep.
5. Since Misplaced Pages is involved in the story we have particular reason to keep. Visitors could construe a deletion, merge, or redirect as a less than forthcoming response. Durova 21:29, 11 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting 4

User's ninth edit.
This is the users sole edit. I think we should disregard it (even though he's voting the way I did). (Bjorn Tipling 02:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC))

Voting 5

  • Keep And it doesn't hurt that it pisses the guy off, he's an asshole.
This is an anonymous vote (and he's uncivil), I say disregard (even though again he voted the way I did. :( )(Bjorn Tipling 02:11, 12 December 2005 (UTC))

DELETE. The man tries to hold himself up as somoene who stepped forward when he learned of the damage he caused, but the truth is, he was traced by his IP address. DELETE.

MERGE. This article belongs with the biography. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.112.90.243 (talk • contribs)

  • KeeporMerge'--User:Smerk
  • Keep. He is way above the bar we commonly set for notability. I'm not saying that the events are equivalent in importance, but we have an article for the driver who told Rosa Parks to give up her seat, because his action precipitated a notable event. Only merge and redirect if a new norm is being created, so I can make redirects out of the stubs of minor TV characters I keep running into. - BanyanTree 02:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge Although this individual vandalized Misplaced Pages, he shouldn't be singled out and should instead be merged into the page on the controversy, as everything here pertains only to the controversy. --Jackson 03:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge Per above. --Dana 03:33, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I created it as Brian Chase (Misplaced Pages prankster) last night because I thought he was encyclopedic (If Nick Leeson can get into Misplaced Pages for one screwup with major consequences, I think Chase belongs). It got turned into a redirect. Whatever. I also think this might deter non-vandalism–oriented jokes here by making sure this is what they get out of their 15 minutes. And, in that vein, I propose a new category: People who must never be allowed on Misplaced Pages again. (Just kidding). Daniel Case 03:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Let's not give this guy too much credit. Leeson, after a period of fraud and over $1bn in losses, caused the collapse of Barings Bank, rocked the financial markets and put 100s out of work. So far Chase is the only person to lose his job over this, and I doubt that Rogue Vandal is in the works with Robert Redford as Siegenthaler and Ewan McGregor as Chase. -- JJay 15:48, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
      • COMMENT Yeah, but it looks like he's just kicked off the largest, most active deletion vote in the history of Misplaced Pages (Does anyone keep these records? Has any deletion vote ever drawn this many users, even factoring out sock puppets?) That in itself confers notablility.
      • How about a compromise that would deter vandals alright ... Keep the article on Misplaced Pages; Delete the subject from reality (Joke! Joke! Joke!). Daniel Case 03:22, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge' with some of the mentioned articles --Chester br 04:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge After reading many opinions listed above I have actually changed from the opinion I came here with (keep) to merge. Kudos to everyone for putting forth good arguments. akds
  • Keep - I've heard of so many wikiers bash on the mainstream media and encyclopedia writers by saying they cover up their own misdeeds and embarassments. Well, Brian Chase is an embarassment to the Misplaced Pages...and wouldn't you know, the citizen reference writers are trying to cover it up. "The more things change, the more they remain the same..." 24.2.49.140 05:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - I would say any and all factual statements belong in Misplaced Pages. If what was written about Brian Chase is true, and is presented from a neutral viewpoint, then it stays. User:Georgeccampbell
  • Keep - Newsworthy, and the name may go down in net history/parlance as a prominent example of a particular web phenomenon. Do delete the next 225 trolls who try to achieve the notoriety in the same way. edgarde 05:32, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting 6

I've changed my vote to include Redirect.Jam2k 10:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's the first big hoax for Misplaced Pages, and one of the 'turning points' for the Internet.
  • Delete and no merge and I am very stongly about that. This story was interesting, but it has gone to far. Let it die. Do we really want this in a published book of Misplaced Pages if it ever happens? --^BuGs^ 08:00, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment Then I suppose we don't need the controversy article also, if your view is considered. But that page has already been voted to be kept and merging this into that would be the most appropriate thing to do. Jam2k
  • Reply That one is fine. This is page is just ridiculas. Also I think the controversy section on John Seigenthaler Sr. should be removed too.
  • Keep. Misplaced Pages's reputation suffered because of the actions of Brian Chase.
    • So? Everytime a twelve year old puts a penis in George W. Bush makes Misplaced Pages's reputation suffer (provided someone sees it, of course).--Sean|Black 08:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
      • To be fair, the major difference in this case is that the vandalised article in question received worldwide press coverage, resulting in a major policy change on Misplaced Pages (only registered users may create new pages), the resignation of the vandal from their place of employment, and follow-up news coverage focused on the person personally responsible for the vandalism. If Willy on Wheels were to receive this type of coverage, he/she/they would warrant a Misplaced Pages article as well. Hall Monitor 17:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. His life is not that interesting aside from this singular act. I vote to merge it with the John_Seigenthaler_Sr._Wikipedia_biography_controversy. jasker
  • Merge into Seigenthalergate, or, failing that, delete.--Sean|Black

Voting 7

  • Keep Totally agree with the accountability argument Jbarfield 13:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Just about notable, though I am uncomfortable about giving such "recognition" to vandals/dispensers of misinformation. Plus I have a strange feeling Seigenthaler wouldn't be too fond of an article on Brian Chase being merged into an article about him ;-) SoLando (Talk) 13:59, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • I voted to delete the Seigenthaler controversy article, and now I think I was wrong about that. It seems to getting a lot more attention than I thought. I was worried about having an excessive focus on things that happen to us, a different standard of notability, or skewed perception...but now I'm pretty sure that article is worth having. So, when I look at this article on Brian Chase, my first reaction is to think it should be merged/redirected, and anything worth saying can go in that controversy article. But, I figure I ought to learn a lesson and err on the side of a keep vote, because if you're in doubt a keep vote is usually the way to go. I think on the article talk page it might be a good idea to discuss merging there, though, and let the editors who are interested in the subject make a decision about that. I think in an uncertain case it's a good idea to put down a vote for keeping it, but also urge interested editors on the talk page to look at it more deeply and make an eventual decision about whether to merge it or keep it independent. A keep vote doesn't necessarily have to contradict eventual merging; I would expect interested editors in the future to make a better decision than me. It just means "keep pending talk page review". Everyking 14:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
    • As a side note, I also want to say I feel really sorry for the guy. Vandalism and deliberate inaccuracy can't be tolerated, but it should be dealt with quietly here on Misplaced Pages, not through all this press coverage. He shouldn't have to suffer in his real life for this, just because Seigenthaler wanted to blow it up out of proportion to serve his idea that Misplaced Pages is dangerous, or whatever it is he thinks. But anyway. Everyking 14:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep I happen to know Seigenthaler through professsional ties. He is an honorable man and I think his airing of this editing issue is valid. It is just as valid for us to publicize the person who dishonored him. Not for retribution, but for accuracy. Jayson Blair, Janet Cooke and other infamous journalists of the past, for example, should be remembered as the scoundrels they were just as accurately as we remember the heroes. Kazari 14:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to John Seigenthaler Sr. Misplaced Pages biography controversy - deserves coverage in the main article but no, IMO, his own article. CLW 14:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Chase ignited an international controversy and sparked some fairly important debate on the nature of Misplaced Pages by his ill-considered actions, which I think makes him notable enough to have his own entry.--Chuckhoffmann 15:03, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with John Seigenthaler Sr. Misplaced Pages biography controversy. I've never seen so many people vote on one issue. I'd hate to be the one counting the votes! Davidpdx 15:12, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep of Merge with John Seigenthaler Sr. Misplaced Pages biography controversy. The information needs to be available. I'm not sure if we should be giving this joker free advertising but at the same time, this is important to the events in question. Moonsword 15:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep, easily meets and exceeds the bar of WP:BIO. Silensor 15:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge to John Seigenthaler Sr. Misplaced Pages biography controversy. Larsinio 15:45, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or redirect This entry is essential to preserving the credibility of Misplaced Pages. This whole situation demonstrates that a self-correcting entity like Misplaced Pages can be a reliable source for information and that it does have all the necessary safety measures built in for policing its content.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.110.78.109 (talk • contribs) 15:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Holy freaking cow, that's a lot of RfD responses! I think I'll just pass... :) — RJH 15:57, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect per CharonX. I feel it would set a dangerous precedent if this article were left in the main article space, as it is both self-referential and a positive reward for hoaxing. Just zis  Guy, you know? / AfD? 16:10, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep To do anything else but keep this article would be the same as a cover-up!!! Some users should also be careful what they say about people outside of the article sites as well such as Rfiend who seems to libel people at the drop of a hat! Dwain 16:16, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete If we were to keep this article, we might as well keep an article on every person mentioned in the news, regardless of how important or unimportant they are. This gentleman, before this incident, was non-notable and will be non-notable after the incident has faded from our memories. There is absolutely no need for an article, no matter how brief it is, to be written about him. --Vortex 16:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP- very notable Astrotrain 16:35, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to the article on the controversy. This article is basically the last part of that one. - David Gerard 17:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep -- He's now made so many newspapers that he hit the top of the news.google.com page. Even if he never does anything else newsworthy in his life, he's earned himself a spot in the encyclopedia. --Mareino 17:15, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • KEEP - Removing such a noteworthy event in Misplaced Pages's history would mar it's reputation, similar to a cover up. I would suggest this be kept as a learning experience to make this tool better.--Britsda 17:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep and then discuss what to do with the content (merge or keep seperate) once the media publicity blitz dies down. Hall Monitor 17:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect; cut down on the self-referencing. Ral315 (talk) 17:22, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge, and agree with feeling sorry for him. OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 17:30, 12 December 2005 (UTC) (From talk: Due to the size of the page, I cannot now edit it to add my vote... Could somebody please add this on my behalf. So signed by User:SusanLarson on his behalf.)
  • Keep. This man was just mentioned on a BBC Radio 4 news programme. If the BBC considers him notable, so do I. Dmn 17:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Comment But he's only notable for this hoax. Most of the info already exists in or could be easily integrated into the controversy article. Unless he becomes notable for something additional, I don't see a compelling reason to have a separate article for him. MeekSaffron 17:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
    • Being "mentioned" in a news programme does not equal notability. I bet thousands of people are mentioned by the BBC in its news programmes. JoaoRicardo 06:58, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete Misplaced Pages anonymity is one of its greatest assets, this article publicizes an editors mistake and ridicules him. It also may fall under Misplaced Pages:No_personal_attacks --Prodego 17:50, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to the contraversy article, not notable outside event.D-Rock 17:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or if we must merge into the Siegenthaler subarticle.  ALKIVAR™ 18:04, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete as it does not contain anything that's not already in the controversy article. I don't think we need a second article to mirror aspects of the main article. --Bringa 18:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - up for deletion? What gives? Merge is also possible, as there's not much here just now, but the story's not over yet. And what would a deletion look like to the outside world? --Plumbago 18:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Don't delete this article, because this 'accident' was in the media so hard. --Johannes Buchner
  • TATTOO TO JIMBO WALES' FOREHEAD. Why? Why not. Really, the arguments here are quite amusing, not unlike those squeaky toys you get out of a vending machine, but like such toys, you quickly realize there's hundreds of them, they're pretty much the same, and they're all worth about a quarter. By the way, this is a keep or merge. --Jscott 19:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge, move the drummer back, and add a disambiguation notice for John Seigenthaler Sr. Misplaced Pages biography controversy. Austin Hair ✍ ✉ 20:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge. A Minor player in a second rate event (Think about the event as if it had happened 5 years ago) 5 years from now noone will care. The event is part of history, so keep the event. But not the 3rd dwarf from the right. 213.235.192.21 20:17, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. An important event that may shape Misplaced Pages policy for years to come. A man who has changed the way people look at Misplaced Pages in a major way. There are many other less important articles about more minor people. This could easily be something people care about 5 years from now.160.36.121.50 21:09, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Part of Misplaced Pages history. --Neverborn 21:31, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge with John_Seigenthaler_Sr._Wikipedia_biography_controversy with the usual redirect. --Macrakis 00:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • keep please erasing this does not make any sense Yuckfoo 04:50, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • shorten to one sentence and merge. There's nothing encyclopedic to say about this guy which would warrant more than mentioning him in the parent article. Zocky 05:44, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting 8

Unsigned and anonymous votes
  • Keep A vote for keeping it. :)
  • Keep Keep it, it shows honesty and the ability to learn for wikipedia. TimmBauten 12.12.2005, 18:50 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.75.98.242 (talk • contribs) 17:48, December 12, 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep Keep it for the people who'll read wikipedia in 500 years!
  • KEEP Keep it, as a warning for all in the future, that even a hoax can be damageable and disrespectfull. This also shows the flaws of Misplaced Pages and should be remembered as one of the firsts (if so.) Monday, 12.12.2005 17:32
  • Delete This is not an article that belongs in an Encyclopedia. Just because he made a fool of Misplaced Pages, it doesn't mean that Misplaced Pages should in effect try to make a fool of him, by having an article on him. Gosh! 12 Dec 2005 14:46 GMT
  • Keep Keep this article as a self-corrective to Misplaced Pages and warning to future hoaxers. Misplaced Pages cannot claim to be a reliable source of information unless it opens itself up to self-scrutiny. Kemet 12 Dec 2005
  • Keep. It is significant enough to reference in John Seigenthaler's biography. Should that reference be deleted as well?
    Unsigned, presumably anonymous comment, please sign in & sign your posts when voting —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete gives me no information at all. (plus no candy for vandals) Muzzle 09:27, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Mark as a hoax, or preferably put into a hoax Wiki entry. This has become a part of Misplaced Pages History and needs to be preserved in a way that acknowledges that fact.
    Unsigned, presumably anonymous comment, please sign in & sign your posts when voting —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. I went here to look up info on the guy as soon as I saw the report. This has historical context for the wiki project.
    Unsigned, presumably anonymous comment, please sign in & sign your posts when voting —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. He messed with Misplaced Pages, he deserves his infamy. "Revenge is a dish best served cold".
    Unsigned, presumably anonymous comment, please sign in & sign your posts when voting —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's interesting to read.
    Unsigned, presumably anonymous comment, please sign in & sign your posts when voting —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 12:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Merge, modify, edit, whatever...but KEEP because this topic may (or then again it may not) help Misplaced Pages deter real vandals. Then there's its historic significance too.,,,,,Ariele 19:46, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. It's not quite generic enough to be merged into the main article, and why get rid of part of the site's history? Imdwalrus 20:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge, but definitely not delete. If anything, the amount of reactions on this VfD should demonstrate some demonstration of notability. The Minister of War 20:21, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect. By itself not notable. Just more Misplaced Pages clutter. -Wiccan Quagga 20:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge the most useful chunks of information with the Seigenthaler Controversy or put them wherever you see fit and then redirect. Apart from Mr Chase's involvement in this particular case, he's just your average Joe, so I see no point in dedicating him an entire article, and a boring one at that. --Schwallex 20:56, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or Merge, but fdont delete. This man is now part of Misplaced Pages's history, hence he deserves a mention. Omoo 21:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • STRONG KEEP. It is notable, and guess what... being caught, losing your job, feeling the need to apologize doesn't exactly encourage one to vandalize Misplaced Pages. Misguided AFD. - RoyBoy 21:06, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This is now (unfortunately) an historical event in the world of the internet. Misplaced Pages may be the biggest and best wiki, but it isn't the only one. As we progress in time and technology, wiki's will play a bigger part in people's lives. Documenting what is the first national furor over a wiki's vandalism is pertinent information for future generations. Jaileer 21:25, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge -- Subject of article is seemingly non-notable outside of Siegenthaler issue. Partial players in larger events do not presumptively merit their own individual article. If Mr. Chase continues to act in the public eye this may change, but for the moment he fits squarely into the Siegenthaler controversy article. It would be repetitive to multicast his involvement into a second article. Redirection may be appropriate. -- Adrian 21:26, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • *Keep. obviously. The fact that a gazillion people have voted here is testament to it's popularity. Anybody who wants to delete is denying their own reasons for coming to this page in the first place. There are better candidates for deletion out there that nobody cares about. "do we really want to reward and encourage more activity like this by giving it additional notoriety?" Huh? While we're at it, let's delete Hitler's entry, too. Malnova 22:20, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep -This gained considerable coverage on various cable news channels, and a big controversy within Misplaced Pages --BrenDJ 22:28, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge -G Clark 22:38, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep JH 128.214.200.202 22:43, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable because he is part of what led to WP removing abilities from anon users. nae'blis (talk) 22:53, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep or at least Merge and redirect if the article don't grow three kb --Marc Lacoste 22:58, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete or at least Merge. He won't be remembered in 3 weeks, much less in 3 years. Carlossuarez46 23:01, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge we should not make a scapegoat out of this guy, after all he admitted to his "deeds". Mieciu K 23:05, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This is illustrative information highly relevant to the discussion of the viability of the wikipedia concept proper. 84.167.142.65 23:08, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep This is now a part of Wiki history and shows the own honesty and power to document facts of interest in a neutral manner. See the german article of the Spiegel Kt66 23:14, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. The Wookieepedian 23:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep: RENTASTRAWBERRY röck 23:52, 12 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. --Stbalbach 00:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting 9

  • Strong Keep. —the preceding unsigned comment is by 68.124.137.87 (talk • contribs) 01:02, December 13, 2005
  • Strong Keep - His existance and relevance are proven by his already being here, deleting him would be attempting to alter historical purity. laurens.whipple 02:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Absolutely non-notable and forgotten by everyone in several months. Misplaced Pages is encyclopedia of important things. Pavel Vozenilek 02:15, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge to Misplaced Pages Biography contreversy, there is no point of having some computer vandal article on Misplaced Pages. Firstly, having an article for a Misplaced Pages vandal will probably incite more vandals to follow his antics. Also, aside from sparking of his little prank, he is pretty much unnotable (and considering the amount of Misplaced Pages vandals, he is not so relevant considering other actions such as date changing and spurious biographies are NOT foreign to Misplaced Pages). However, considering the long reaching effect of this dude, one needs to merge it with the already crazy Misplaced Pages controversy article. No need to keep this guy around and give him an article likes he's a trophy. εγκυκλοπαίδεια* (talk) 16:53, 10 December 2005 (UTC) 02:39, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete non-notable. --Elian 02:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • VERY STRONG DELETE - committing an act of libel or slander does not make one notable, even if it is against a person of note. Some of the arguments for keep here are apalling. Keeping it because he deserves further soiling of his reputation? That's just as wrong a use of wikipedia as what Chase did is. Pacian 03:46, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Extra Strong Keep - Exercising total and complete honesty is done by keeping things level, balanced and fair -- especially with things that might reflect negativly upon the place hosting them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.68.67.59 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete. Tell me, how is he any more notable than the thousands of other IP vandals? We don't have mainspace articles on User:Michael or User:Willy on Wheels or now, do we? – ugen64 03:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Keep and merge the information into Seigenthalergate. I want to see the day that wikipedia is so exhaustive in scope that it contains every man, woman, and child. Also pets. JeffWaxman 04:02, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Merge to main controversy page. He has no useful importance outside of the controversy. This kind of thing was bound to happen sooner or later due to the public's and media's misunderstanding or misrepresentation of the nature of Misplaced Pages and he just happened to be the first one that garnered media attention. Nightwalker 04:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. The libelous Siegenthaler edit is a big story, as shown by the national news coverage given to the identification of this hoaxster. I believe there will be interest in this controversy's two main participants as long as there's interest in Misplaced Pages. Rcade 04:10, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into Seigenthalergate and redirect. Jasmol 04:12, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge into the other article (as it has been dubbed, "Seigenthalergate")and redirect. --N410 04:21, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep because he's notable enough to warrant his own page. The fact is, his identity and name have widely reported. As a result, he's not just another vandal, I'm surprised that some people don't appear to understand this. Whether or not it will encourage other vandals is irrelevant. We should not hide an article just because it may encourage vandalism. The widespread reporting is far more likely to encourage further vandals anyway. Merge with redirect is acceptable but not preferble. He's now notable enough for his own article... Nil Einne 04:36, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep -- Ratclaw 04:26, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete, doesn't meet WP:BIO in my opinion. Unless you buy into the tabloid press of course.Gateman1997 04:27, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - I only found this page thanks to Yahoo. I think that's notable and newsworthy enough to warrant it staying. --Beau99|talk 04:28, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete --as many have said it is important not to reward a "hoaxer" so that such activity is not encrouaged. There has already been enough attention to the matter to encourage further vandalism. Why encourage more? 129.15.203.74 04:43, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep - Mr. Brian Chase is an honourable and upstanding citizen of the United States. By deleting his entry Misplaced Pages risks damaging its reputations further for "covering-up". 129.97.252.63 04:48, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. "'I'm glad this aspect of it is over,' Seigenthaler, 78, said. But he expressed concern that 'every biography on Misplaced Pages is going to be hit by this stuff - think what they'd do to Tom DeLay and Hillary Clinton, to mention two. My fear is that we're going to get government regulation of the Internet as a result.'" (source: Yahoo! News -- "Author Apologizes for Fake Misplaced Pages Entry" http://news.yahoo.com/s/usatoday/20051212/tc_usatoday/authorapologizesforfakewikipediabiography) Brian Chase is a key player in an event that could bring about consequences for all of us. For the simple fact that there's national debate about government regulation of the internet, it defies logic to say that Brian Chase is not noteworthy. He's part of the reason there's national debate to begin with, and while he may not be the person who has sparked said debate (Siegenthaler gets credit for that, with the article he wrote in USA Today), there wouldn't be any debate, had he not done what he did. Everyone knows what caused the World Wars, everyone knows what lead up to Roe v. Wade and to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, everyone knows about the draft during Vietnam, and everyone should know about what Brian Chase did. To play any kind of role in bringing about such debate that could lead to a landmark decision, especially one that deals with privacy laws, freedom of speech, and a whole slew of other issues, is definitely noteworthy. --Putainsdetoiles 04:59, 13 December 2005 (UTC)

Voting 10

Confused

It's not over, I just wish it was. This Afd sure looks out of control to me. See my explanation on Talk:Brian Chase (Misplaced Pages hoaxer). Friday (talk) 14:51, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
PS. A redirect does not require a "deletion" (in the Misplaced Pages sense of "deletion"). It's a "normal edit" that anyone can do at any time. Bizarre loophole, eh? Kinda makes you wonder why we attach such strange song and dance routines to deletion, doesn't it? Friday (talk) 14:55, 13 December 2005 (UTC)
This is just plain wrong!!! As usual the peoples vote is being ignored!!! Tally the vote before doing this hide and seek routine!!! Dwain 15:07, 13 December 2005 (UTC)