Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gregory R. Smith

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 No concensus for deletion--JForget 02:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Gregory R. Smith

Gregory R. Smith (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I originally prodded this article but a user objected so here it is at AfD. As I implied in the prod reason, if the subject doesn't want a personal website and has indicated a need for privacy, and is not especially notable, we shouldn't have an article about him on an encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Indeed I found this article because an anonymous user removed some negative unsourced information - I'm referring to the second paragraph, not the first. As I also mentioned in my prod reason, I found this article about him from a reliable source, the Washington Post - however, it's terribly out-of-date. The article is also effectively orphaned - by that I mean that it is not linked anywhere in Wikipedia besides in a list. I was going to clean up this article but I thought deletion would be a better option per WP:BLP concerns. Graham87 07:42, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

• Weak keep provided every single detail is meticulously verified and no non-notable details are left behind. (That's always a good practice.) This may never amount to more than a small stub and would perhaps be more suited to a few sentences in a larger list of child prodigies. Do a google search for gregory smith prodigy or something similar to get an idea of how the removal of this article would affect his privacy, something I am sensitive to. --Mud4t 09:37, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep though I'm sure the BLP1E argument will arise. This is an individual who was widely feted a few years ago when he entered college aged 10 and graduated aged 13, even appearing on NBC Nightly News with Tom Brokaw to announce his next move. Finding coverage is trivially easy.[1][2][3][4] Since that time, however, he has apparently chosen to live more privately. Perhaps merge a brief summary to child prodigy and leave this as a redirect, in lieu of a "full" biography for someone who is only just old enough to vote. --Dhartung | Talk 09:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete - As a childs right advocate, the notability approaches zero -- the only enduring notability (if one could call it that) is over the child-prodigy aspect... that it occured almost 10 yrs ago, and has had no lasting impact, makes me consider it isolated and possibly trivial coverage ("hey, lookie here" news). /Blaxthos 12:55, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Merge per Dhartung, but into List of child prodigies. A sentence with a reference or two (the ones located by Dhartung would do nicely; the ones at the article are unacceptable for the purpose) in article should suffice, unless the individual does something else notable in the future. --Moonriddengirl 13:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Weak Keep to Merge. At best, as it is borderline depending on how you look at it. • Lawrence Cohen 20:08, 16 September 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep notability is permanent. But the article is really a mess in almost every respect. DGG (talk) 19:16, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
• Keep. Probably one of my weakest keep views ever, but hopefully this can be improved. If not, relist it again in a few weeks and see what happens. Burntsauce 17:20, 18 September 2007 (UTC)
• Comment: I am neutral, but if the article stays it has to be cleaned up - i.e. comments in references section, POV, etc. Watchingthevitalsigns 12:56, 19 September 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.