Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Black

Don Black and Don Black (non-notable person)

Article fails to establish notability. The User has moved Don Black (nationalist) to [[Don Black (racist}]] and then added this non-notable person and tried to create a disambiguation page. RickK 06:41, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

"Don Black, a self-described racialist and former leader of the Ku Klux Klan." - Stormfront — Preceding unsigned comment added by Softcafe (talk • contribs) 06:49, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

He has now moved the article under Vfd to Don Black (non-notable person) and the other article to Don Black (racialist). RickK 07:07, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

"Don Black, a self-described racialist and former leader of the Ku Klux Klan." - Stormfront. The individual uses the term to describe himself. The term "nationalist" is an obfuscation of "white nationalist". The proper term is "racist", and is the appropriate disambiguation discriminator for the topic heading. Without proper disambiguation, the entire "Don Black" entry and sub-entries should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.15.75.108 (talk • contribs) 07:13, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Perhaps the fact that this person is non-notable is his most notable aspect, and representative of a segment of society unrepresented on Wikipedia. I vote keep it online. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.200.240.250 (talk • contribs) 07:32, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• Thanks to user:RickK and user:CesarB for trying to fix this mess. The editor, Softcafe, did all the wrong things for perhaps a somewhat right reason. I think that "Don Black" is a sufficiently common name, and the one Black has sufficiently high notoriety, that having a disambiguation page, even with only a few instances, may help inform our readers and prevent confusion. Lastly, I notice that there may be a (barely) notable profesor (Don V. Black) with verifiable information.[1] Maybe the article "Don Black (non-notable person)" could be moved to Don Black (physicist) and I'll see if I can dig together enough of Dr. Black's discoveries and facts to make a decent stub. I am familiar with the milieu of the more famous Don Black, though I've barely edited that article. "Racist" would be a POV description, but I believe the "Racialist" may be appropriate. It is on a par with "Nationalist", though slightly different, and is sometimes used by [racists] to describe themselves. However "activist" seems to be an NPOV term for similar subjects (e.g. Bill White (activist)) so I suggest moving Don Black (racialist) to Don Black (activist). -Willmcw 07:40, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

"Don Black (activist)" will require another level of disambiguation, since the "Don Black (non-notable person)" may consider himself an activist, and lead to more activity. The "Don Black (racialist)" is most appropriate, as noted above. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.200.240.250 (talk • contribs) 07:48, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Yes, or "Don Black (non-notable person)" may also come to consider himself a racialist. We can worry about those when they happen. (I'm not worried about Don Black (racialist) ever wanting to be known as "Don Black (non-notable person)") PS - please sign and date your posts. -Willmcw 08:22, Jun 17, 2005 (UTC)

Gentlemen -

While I am affiliated with UCI, I am not a professor.

However, there is another Don Black who is notable. He is the classic "Right Stuff" individual. He is a former Executive Vice President and General Manager of the McDonnell-Douglas Corporation. He was a pilot in indonesia during WW-II (flew the hump). He is still saving lives by donating his time to managing an organization that finds shelter for the homeless in Southern California. He also contributes his time to other charitable works such as ensuring open-space will exist in Southern California for our children.

The original generic "Don Black (non-notable)" should be allowed to stand on its own merits as representative of the other Don Blacks.

          - Don V Black, Chairman, 
            IEEE Computer Society of Orange County
             6/17/05 11:00AM PDT

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.200.241.74 (talk • contribs) 18:21, 17 Jun 2005 (UTC)

• I truly sympathize with your plight, but I'm trying to see how we can help you. Can you write an article for the encyclopedia about that "Don Black" using verifiable resources? That's what we need. Our efforts have to uphold our principles of "neutral point of view", "no original research", and "consensus editing". Please allow the consensus to decide what name to use for the articles. "Don Black (activist)" appears to be a clear distinction from "Don Black (pilot)" and "Don Black (physicist)". At one time, we had a note at the top of "Don Black" which made clear mention of "Don Black (musician)", even though there is no article about him. We can perhaps do the same for these other Don Blacks. That would save us the disambiguation page. -Willmcw 05:06, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
• I really have a problem with an article about Don Black (non-notable person) since it screams non-encylopedic. Or, am I missing something? If I have this right, then I see this page as a Delete but keeping the DAB page. Vegaswikian 07:14, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
• Of course there's no way we can keep have an article called "Don Black (non-notable person)" for long. Getting back to the general question, there are probably lots of Charles Mansons, et al. - people who share their name with a notorious person. But really, unless the other persons of the same name are notable there's not much that we can do. I don't see any brilliant solutions, but here's my suggestion of the night. I propose that we delete Don Black (non-notable person), keep the Don Black as a disambiguation page with a sentence about each of the other "Don Black"s who deserve minor acknowledgement, and move Don Black (racialist) to Don Black (activist). I've edited the Don Black dab page to cover other Don Blacks. Is this acceptable to Softcafe and others? Cheers, -Willmcw 06:11, Jun 19, 2005 (UTC)

• I am sure that we are all bright enough to realize that the real question before us is not "Don Black (non-notable person)", it is whether Wikimedia will allow "Don Black (racist)" and his supporters to use Wikipedia to promote the Ku Klux Klan, and their particular brand of hate and racism. As for POV, by linking to these websites, we are promoting them.

There is really nothing notable about any of the Don Black's listed, except that their names appear on the internet. My recommendation is that this "VFD" be promoted to include all the "Don Black" entries, especially the one promoting racism, since none of these people are notable. In which case I wold vote that they all be DELETED, or all remain with the DAB. In the later case, I fear that Wikipedia will become irrelevant and eventually join the ranks of National Enquirer. -softcafe Jun 20, 2005