Talk:Stephen H. Webb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Article milestones
Date Process Result
January 23, 2008 Articles for deletion Kept
August 19, 2011 Proposed deletion Kept

Roman Catholic[edit]

The article is not clear as to whether or not Stephen Webb is presently a Roman Catholic; if this were so it would bring into question whether he is best described as an 'evangelical' theologian and philosopher of religion, as the first line states. (Typically, these are seen as exclusive categories, Evangelicalism being a subset of Protestantism.) JayFout 23:11, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Due to ongoing AfD proceedings, I've taken the liberty of transferring it to a more suitable wiki, Wikipopuli. If you don't want it there, just put a note on my user talk page. TheYellowCabin (talk) 03:25, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

The Author doesn't appear to be very notable. While widely published, it doesn't indicate whether any of his books have caused something "notable" to happen in the academic world. Additionally, he doesn't appear to be attached to any significant academic circles, or lines of thought. I think this guy is worth deleting. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 21:49, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete It should be deleted. If you give reign to him, you'll have every professor with an article published putting their bios on Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 22:33, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

RfC: Soccer article[edit]

Should the section titled “Articles on Sports” remain in the entry? Webb is a theologian who writes about culture and politics for popular media. To include a section devoted to responding to a single, evidently humorous article about soccer seems inappropriate to current biography content. --pdbowman 17:23, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Someone added about the soccer article "In this article Stephen insinuates that Soccer might not only be the cause of America “dumbing” down, but also the cause of America’s competitive, or dominating nature. The rest of the world might consider Stephen to be a complete and utter fucking prick for writing said article. This article was more than likely written during the early hours of the morning whilst Stephen was off work on sick leave, due to a sprained wrist whilst masturbating over the American flag and hurling lumps of his own faeces at maps of Europe." Might be a little over the top - is there a source that confirms that this is what the rest of the world thinks, and supporting his fetishes? Nfitz (talk) 20:24, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

  • Remove-- I have removed the section called Articles in Sports per WP:BLP which says: "Contentious material about living persons (or in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced – whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable – should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." The section was critical of the BLP subject and has been challenged by editors including myself and so I have removed it.-- KeithbobTalk 21:27, 19 December 2013 (UTC)


Should the soccer article be considered satirical? I thought so at first possibly, but from his other "Serious" writings, it seems to be fully in line with his worldview. --Gary123 (talk) 17:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Webb's article, “Soccer Is Ruining America,” is plainly a humor piece. He doesn't really think soccer is ruining America. If the reader is uncertain at the article's beginning whether Webb really thinks soccer is ruining America, the reader has no excuse for uncertainty by the end of it. The final line is, “my kids and I come home from a soccer game a very happy family.” The section about Webb's article is out of place in a Wikipedia biographical entry. It needs to be removed. --pdbowman 16:57, 10 December 2013 (UTC)


As a matter of course, an article that was previously kept at AFD should not be deleted by a PROD. If you want to delete this article you should AFD it.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:32, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Article needs serious clean up[edit]

Kudos to those that have made good faith contributions here but this is not an appropriate way to write a WP:BLP. A BLP is not a place to espouse the point of view or philosophy of a person unless those views have been reported in reliable news sources or books and have been deemed notable. There is a lot of editorializing in this article and it needs to be rewritten. For that purpose I've placed some cleanup tags on the article to attract some experienced editors who can help with that process. Thank you again for your time and efforts in improving the article. Let me know if you have any questions. Cheers! -- KeithbobTalk 21:44, 19 December 2013 (UTC)