Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert David Steele (3rd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.

The result was keep. MBisanz ^talk 01:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Robert David Steele[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

While there was some coverage of his death, same issues as last AfD still appear. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 16:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I was going to speedy-delete this in accordance with WP:G4 when I noticed that the subject has had additional coverage since the last time this was deleted, particularly in the context of COVID-19. I have restored all of the previously deleted history so that it can be examined. This version of article still has some of the same problems as the previously-deleted version, but I felt the additional coverage may finally put this subject over the threshold of notability, which is why we now have another AFD discussion. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Conspiracy theories-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of COVID-19-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:56, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 17:40, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I can see how this guy's notability was iffy before, but the coverage of his death pushes him over the hump IMO. valereee (talk) 19:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 00:42, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: He was a major figure in the new age conspiracism movement. His death was widely reported in reliable secondary sources. Even if RDS's ideas clearly marked him as a fringe crackpot he became notable in his death and the aftermath. Salimfadhley (talk) 18:39, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. notable. This is the sort of person where people will look for some (hopefully) unbiased information. DGG ( talk ) 07:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Concur re notability, he was a fairly well recognized individual in independent online media. Chris Rodgers (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 05:49, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.