Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhys Morgan: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:05, 2 December 2011

Rhys Morgan

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Very sophisticated hoax, or highly contrived non notable joke. In any case, this person and the creation of his article is a highly dubious 'notable' person whose place in Wikipedia is questionable at best. Not notable, potential hoax, potential 'what we made up in school' jape. The edit summaries suggest this is a joke article or the result of some kind of 'dare'. Not a known figure in the United Kingdom. Not a successful household name. Not notable in his field. doktorb _words^deeds 11:06, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

KEEP. I can verify that this is no hoax, and I would bet a year's worth of my edits that nothing to date in this article has been touched by anyone at a UK school. Since when did anyone have to be a household name to appear in any encyclopedia? The subject has made his mark in the field of advocacy about science and health claims. BrainyBabe (talk) 11:12, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. The references and material in the public domain speak for themselves. This is neither a hoax nor a joke and after being involved in two separate significant and public incidences of questioning what appears to be pseudo-science I would say the notability criteria is also met. Jjasi (talk) 11:38, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Medicine-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 11:52, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP. This is not a hoax or a joke. Rhys Morgan has been featured on television, and has (quickly, admittedly) become really quite well-known within the sceptic community. El Pollo Diablo (Talk) 11:57, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Not a hoax. Generally The Guardian, BBC News Online and so on don't tend to print "stuff we made up in school" stories. Morgan has appeared on TV on The One Show - see this YouTube video. (Perhaps a bit of WP:BEFORE, next time?) —Tom Morris (talk) 11:58, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Regarding the notability claim? WP:BLP1E doesn't apply here. The article satisfies W:GNG: just look at the references! WP:AUTHOR might apply, in which case Morgan satisfies the first criteria (widely cited by peers in the skeptical community, somewhat cited by the mainstream press). Mentions in the press are not passing mentions either. Clearly passes the relevant notability tests which is significantly lower than being a "household name" (a standard which would require us to remove biographical articles on virtually every scientist, academic, writer, philosopher and so on). —Tom Morris (talk) 12:11, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Recent article in his own right at Guardian.co.uk, the website of The Guardian further evidence that Rhys is, if anything, becoming more notable. Also, though I am unsure that it should be part of the notability criteria, his youth could be considered a positive in terms of impact. Faragher (talk) 12:28, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP. Seriously. Even a cursory amount of research would verify the references and his notability in the field of debunking quack medicine. Queex (talk) 12:32, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snow keep - per above Barts1a | Talk to me | Yell at me 13:14, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP.OK, so Rhys may not be an A-list celebrity, but he is very well known among skeptic circles. Bear in mind that he's appeared on BBC TV's "The One Show" and recently wrote an article for the Guardian. Rhys does great work in exposing quack medicine, and deserves to be even better known. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AdamJacobs (talk • contribs) 13:29, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
'KEEP He's definitely notable.--Crgn (talk) 13:37, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP Notable. An unusual figure in the world of critical thinking, one of the youngest in his field - extremely active and involved. This will be the start of a long history of this character. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleyfrieze (talk • contribs) 13:41, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP definitely a real and notable figure, and becoming more so. --Funkodrom 13:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep please. Rhys is real and I cannot understand the motivation for claiming he is a hoax.

Basket Press (talk)

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 * '''KEEP''' definitely a real and notable figure, and becoming more so. --[[User:Funkodrom|Funkodrom]]  13:47, 2 December 2011 (UTC)</span>
 <!-- Template:Unsigned --> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->
+* Keep please. Rhys is real and I cannot understand the motivation for claiming he is a hoax.
+[[User:Basket Press|Basket Press]] ([[User talk:Basket Press|talk]])