Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Worcester

Donald Worcester was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE

Teacher-vanity? Don't let it be said RC-patrolling is boring.. --fvw * 00:33, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)

Delete. This article screams non-notable. [[User:Livajo|Ливай | ☺]] 01:58, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete *Delete as non-notable, non-encyclopedic. Joyous 02:14, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Note: User:128.227.40.231 has been changing the comments of participants in this discussion. Joyous 03:21, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)

Delete: Teacher tribute. I always love these things, and I have had one written about me, but it wasn't on an encyclopedia. I taught 'em better'n that. Geogre 02:22, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete, non-notable - the guy doesn't even show up on google. --Spangineer ∞ 02:34, Dec 17, 2004 (UTC)
Delete, vanity remains deletable if it happens to be written by someone else. - Andre Engels 02:58, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep "Donny served, or rather survived, five years at Wymore, years that included four death threats and numerous other incidents directly threatening to his life." How many teacher's get "death threats"? This article also well written, and certainly not a stub. Masterhomer 03:13, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Receiving death threats is an unfortunate way of life for people in teaching and the caring profession around the world, it most certainly does not make a person notable. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:41, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  - I believe this is noteable enough to be included in Wikipedia, and even an intersting and well written addition to Wikipedia. Vote stands. Masterhomer 06:03, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete this amusingly-written prank. Wyss 03:26, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep, this entire article is factually true. while written in a comical tone by those who know worcester personally, this article serves as collective documentation of the worcester's experiences which he often shares with his students. this article is both informative and entertaining..please consider the students. reilly06, 10:27, 17 Dec 2004
- I seriously doubt the entire contents are true. JD 00:03, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
  - Do not talk without knowing what your talking about JD, How would you know the truthfullness of this article? Get proof, and then talk. Badinfluenceno1 04:29, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Note: This vote constitutes this user's only two edits to wikipedia using this username thus far. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:39, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Keep, this guy actually does appear on google on the second page. also this article is well-written, and if it is true he seems like a pretty commendable guy.D3swooshg 03:34, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Note: This vote constitutes this user's only two edits to wikipedia using this username thus far. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:38, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- Note: This user happens to be rather biased... he's actually a student of the teacher in question. Besides, he's Canadian... -- JD 00:03, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
  - Why does D3swooshg's being Canadian change anything? Badinfluenceno1 04:33, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    - Note: Hey JD, now you know why nobody likes you, if you hadn't already figured it out before. Oh, and by the way Graham, where are your useful comments about the user's history when it comes to somebody against the article, such as JD. Let's try and keep this discussion unbiased and focused on the article, not on individual users, such as myself. D3swooshg 04:36, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
      - You may have noticed that JD, unlike yourselves, didn't show up out of nowhere and try to cast a vote, for or against the article. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:07, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
        Actually, the funny thing is, HE DID. He has no history. D3swooshg 19:36, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
        Part of your statement is true; he has no history, or at least, he has about as much of a history as you, reilly06, and Badinfluenceno1 do. However, if you will read carefully, you will find that the statement was that he "didn't show up out of nowhere and try to cast a vote". He has commented on whether he thinks the article should be kept or not, as all users are allowed to do. That is not the same as casting a vote, which you and reilly06 and Badinfluenceno1 have tried to do five times between the three of you. If you can show me any evidence to the contrary I'd be fascinated to see it. -- Antaeus Feldspar 06:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete: Non notable -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:41, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
~~Keep~~: hmmmm i found two grammar/typos, but thanks for pointing out my history Graham. D3swooshg 03:43, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- No problem, by the way you only get to vote once. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 03:46, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  - ~~Keep~~: Thanks for the heads up Graham. D3swooshg 03:50, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
    - Note: whoa graham, the guy's just being proactive. by the way, you might want to delete one of your identical notes since you like being so correct all the time. -- bell135
      - And I'm just working to keep the number of votes either way in context. And yes I have made identical notes, but if you'll notice it's for two completely different usernames. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 04:17, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
        Graham, I think you missed your crumpets and tea. D3swooshg 04:37, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
        Very funny. -- Graham ☺ | Talk 04:39, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
        I'm sorry Graham, I suppose that last comment was nearly as obnoxious as you. -- D3swooshg 05:04, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Someone is having fun with themselves, apparently. [[User:Radman1|RaD Man (talk)]] 07:10, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Is there a BJAODN-type-thing, but for charming stuff like this? There should be. Samaritan 07:24, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete. And ban the sockpuppets. P Ingerson 07:40, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Nice try, but delete as non-notable (etc.) -- Hoary 08:15, 2004 Dec 17 (UTC)
del. Mikkalai 08:51, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
delete. Kill the sockpuppets. We had better nicknames for our teachers at school. Dunc|☺ 11:23, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- It's possible that the sock puppets are all editing from the school... that would make the IP addresses the same. JD 00:03, Dec 18, 2004 (UTC)
keep. to deem this man non-notable is a desecration of all that is holy. Badinfluenceno1 12:55, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC) -- Badinfluenceno1 has only two edits, to this vote and the article itself.
Delete. Jacob1207 16:48, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Vanity, non-encyclopedic, sounds like it's written by a 12 yea old, etc. - Ld 20:25, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
- "Sounds like it's written by a 12 year old, etc." Hey, did you try to make a funny there little guy? Just because you dont understand all the words and get confused easily, it does not mean the article is written by a "12 year old". Others see the genius in it. Badinfluenceno1 21:59, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Uhm, he said it sounds like it was written by a 12 year old. I mention that since you made a remark about someone else's reading skills. So far as literary genius is concerned, wiki is an encyclopedia, not a repository of creatively written bios of locally notable people. This teacher sounds like a great guy, but that's not the point of this discussion. Wyss 02:13, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

So, "sounds like" does not imply that it was? Sounding like a 12 year old implies the literary skills of a 12 year old; which in turn implies that there is a possibility that it was written by a 12 year old; hence, "written by a 12 year old". Badinfluenceno1 04:09, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Not quite, sounds like describes the age-level of the writing style, not the age of the writer. There are lots of people in their 20s and 30s who write like 12 year olds (most Internet forums are replete with examples of this.) Wyss 14:24, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Had this not been vanity, I would suggest improving. You should take a look at other articles and see how they are written. I would agree this could make a great article for your school newspaper, however this writing style does not belong in an encyclopedia. - Ld 06:22, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Delete. Notable to those who know him. Not notable in an encyclopedic sense. -- Antaeus Feldspar 21:32, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Rossami (talk) 22:29, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete, though it's much better written than the average delete-worthy junk. I see some merit to Samaritan's suggestion about having a place to put things like this. JamesMLane 22:50, 17 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete... or can it be moved to BJAODN? I mean, at least it's humorously written. I'm not exactly sure as to how that works as I'm pretty new to the Wikipedia community.
Comment. I'm snoring so hard people are confusing it with geek-like laughter, but I still find the whole thing about as amusing as a tonsillectomy. Regarding the suggestion to have a "place" for things like this: it's called a homepage, and it's very easy to get one these days. That said, there's always room for one more at BJAODN. Alternatively, a separate wiki for students to riff on their teachers in a quasi-eloquent way would no doubt eclipse Wikipedia in no time at all. 82.92.119.11 22:55, 18 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete, if it's a bad joke it's a very bad joke, because it's not funny. Just an article about someone nobody has ever heard of outside of the school. You have to be at least a little bit well known to get an article. Shane King 00:48, Dec 20, 2004 (UTC)
Delete. There's already a place for this type of teacher-cruft. It's called RateMyTeachers.com. Or, for grownups, RateMyProfessors.com. --Szyslak 03:33, 21 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete Michael Ward 02:44, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Delete. Shanes 08:19, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Weak Keep. However, don't we have a Who's Who in America for this?moseythedino 07:43, 22 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.