Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ad van den Berg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 merge. Petros471 10:20, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Ad van den Berg
Non notable child sexual abuser SqueakBox 18:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, and Red mist listing. I criticised the fact that you described Berg's activity as "supposedly political" and you listed it for deletion. Whoops. Anyway, Berg has achieved international notability as an 'out' pedophile and activist. As well as being the subject of many parodies, Berg has achieved minor fame as a member of the PNVD, a notorious but unpopular dutch political party. He has appeared in videos - 1 2 3, articles, etc, etc. Notable political figure. Jim♥Burton 18:24, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Red mist listing? what is that? I listed him for his obvious lack of notability and not because you reverted an edeit of mine. He doesnt have any choice about being out because of his criminal record, SqueakBox 18:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- You keep on listing articles that you have happily contributed to... minutes after I revert edits of yours Jim♥Burton 18:30, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Red mist listing? what is that? I listed him for his obvious lack of notability and not because you reverted an edeit of mine. He doesnt have any choice about being out because of his criminal record, SqueakBox 18:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per above comments by Jim Burton. I know I need to assume good faith, however these AfDs are starting to seem like POV deletions rather than being based on Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. Wildthing61476 18:29, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Absolutely not. These are marginally notable characters who, IMO, dont reach wikipedia's notability standards, esp for BLP (where the weight is on those who support the article inclusion to prove notability), and there is nothing pOV in this. Please assume good faith, SqueakBox 18:34, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- While the party that this subject was involved in forming, Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit, is slightly notable (despite having too few members to participate in elections), I don't see any assertion of the subject's independent notability. There are no profiles of him or other qualifications for WP:BIO. Unless there's something else notable about him I'd tend towards delete. - ·:·Will Beback ·:· 18:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've enhanced notability, by sourcing his views with an expatica article. Berg has media notability. Jim♥Burton 18:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just doing a Google search on his name, I also came across this news article as well Wildthing61476 18:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- That should go into Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit, SqueakBox 18:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, that's about the party, not the subsject. "Dutch paedophile party sparks outrage". The subject is quoted briefly, but otherwise it doesn't tell us anything about him. - ·:·Will Beback ·:· 20:31, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- That should go into Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit, SqueakBox 18:47, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just doing a Google search on his name, I also came across this news article as well Wildthing61476 18:45, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've enhanced notability, by sourcing his views with an expatica article. Berg has media notability. Jim♥Burton 18:43, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep As mentioned above, he meets the criteries for inclusion easily, this delete campain is bad style. V.☢.B 19:13, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete Somebody is pushing a heavy barrow uphill. At best this is a merge candidate to the barely-notable party of which he is part. Lack of non-trivial indpendent sources. Guy (Help!) 20:02, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to the party and redirect. Tony Fox (arf!) 20:17, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Take note, 1. Who is a more notable, more unique case Julien Valero or Ad van den Berg? 2. Who is less controversial? 3. Who is most likely to get deleted? Jim♥Burton 21:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Unquestionably Valero. It takes a lot of dedication and hard work to be a professional football player, SqueakBox 21:28, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Relevant only due to party position. Party article suffices. -Jmh123 22:07, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Are party founders and leaders of other very minor contemporary NL political parties? If so, keep on that basis alone. If not, has is his notability outside of NL sufficient to meet the Wiki-notability threshold? Dfpc 02:22, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- As with the above nomination, merge to the party page Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit. Amazingly enough for a "political party" that has never participated in an election, much less won a seat, the party appears notable. But notability is not contagious, and I fail to see anything which warrants a separate article for any of its participants at this time. Serpent's Choice 10:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
- Merge to Partij voor Naastenliefde, Vrijheid en Diversiteit per Serpent's Choice. The only paragraph worth saving is the first one from activity []...Chairman of Vereniging MARTIJN[2]...misinformation about AIDS and homosexuality. The rest is unreferenced. xC | ☎ 19:37, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
- 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.
