Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kenneth Wapnick: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
* '''Comment'''. Just to inform fellow editors: it appears that the nomination of this page by [[User:Ste4k|Ste4k]] for deletion is a “bad faith” deletion attempt. [[User:Ste4k|Ste4k]] has recently submitted deletion nominations for all of the following [[A Course in Miracles]]-related articles: [[Helen Schucman]], [[William Thetford]], [[Foundation for Inner Peace]], [[Foundation for A Course In Miracles]], [[Gary Renard]], [[Kenneth Wapnick]]. And in the article [[Authorship of A Course in Miracles]], [[User:Ste4k|Ste4k]] will not accept ANY websites as “verifiable” websites with regard to ACIM, including [http://www.acim.org/ http://www.acim.org/] and [http://www.facim.org/ http://www.facim.org/], 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 Wikipedia policy. -- [[User:Andrew Parodi|Andrew Parodi]] 00:40, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
----
----
===[[Kenneth Wapnick]]===
===[[Kenneth Wapnick]]===
''Reason this article should be deleted:''
''Reason this article should be deleted:''


'''This article has been determined to be noncompliant to [[Wikipedia:List_of_policies#Content|Wikipedia content policy]] as discussed in it's [[Talk:Kenneth_Wapnick#Analysis_for_deletion|Analysis for Deletion]] based on :'''
'''[[User:Ste4k|Ste4k]] believes that this article has been determined to be noncompliant to [[Wikipedia:List_of_policies#Content|Wikipedia content policy]] as discussed in it's [[Talk:Kenneth_Wapnick#Analysis_for_deletion|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* [[WP:NOR]] - Articles may not contain any previously unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas that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* [[WP:NOR]] - Articles may not contain any previously unpublished theories, data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas; or any new analysis or synthesis of published data, statements, concepts, arguments, or ideas that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.

Revision as of 00:40, 28 June 2006


Reason this article should be deleted:

Ste4k believes that this article has been determined to be noncompliant to Wikipedia 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 Wikipedia 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 - Wikipedia is not a soapbox or a vehicle for propaganda and advertising. Therefore, Wikipedia articles are not propaganda or advocacy of any kind.
  • WP:NOT - Wikipedia 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)[reply]

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)[reply]
Yes, but it seems it was written by a close friend of his [1], 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)[reply]
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)[reply]