Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kurt Nimmo

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 delete. - Mailer Diablo 02:08, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Kurt Nimmo

Kurt Nimmo (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Acticle about blogger fails WP:BIO; ongoing edit war with WP:BLP issues which may be sole rationale for this article's existence. He wrote a book, but its printer is a vanity press. Kendrick7^talk 00:09, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete agree with nominator's reasoning. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:12, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete His only publication comes from a non-notable printing press. As a blogger/photographer, I don't see any evidence that he has made any significant contributions. the_undertow ^talk 02:33, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment That's not correct. See my comment below. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Response Would all contributors to a notable publication be considered notable? Or are you asserting that his particular contributions are significant? the_undertow ^talk 04:45, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• Keep A NPOV bio is invaluable in the case of any writer who's work is sometimes referenced and/or controversial in order to evaluate the credibility of their work (I always search for a bio in such cases); the "ongoing" edit war is no longer ongoing as one party (who was Kurt Nimmo himself) has accepted the current version, which involved changing only a single sentence, as NPOV. The current related "dispute" is that Nimmo's support for a deniers freedom of speech infers (without any other evidence) that he supports the deniers views as well, which is a WP:OR issue, not grounds for deletion. Wayne 04:25, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Comment I can't speak to his popularity in the blogosphere. Are you suggesting his blog would pass WP:WEB? -- Kendrick7^talk 07:00, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

• Delete The man's creative writings seem to amount to very little and the strangeness of his political opinions - that Auschwitz has "discredited gas chambers" for example - is no claim to notability. Nick mallory 07:07, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Not notable, as above. Drmaik 09:42, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Weak keep. He also wrote for Counterpunch which appears to be a notable publication. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:14, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete He is notable within the "conspiracy related culture" (Probably a bad way to say it, but I'm not sure how). He gets traffic from sites like Alex Jones' site(s), Jeff Rense's site, and whatreallyhappened.com, I believe. However, writing a biography on this person would be tough, as I see no independent reliable sources. He writes and has ideas about controversial things, which makes good sourcing imperative. If sources outside of his own blog turn up, I would probably decide to keep. BTW, the see also link to new antisemitism seems very POV to me. Keep in mind that if we were discussing Mr. Nimmo at a bar I may agree with you, but it just seems like inappropriate POV pushing. hombre de haha 11:57, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete BLP about a blogger 'nuf said. Mangoe 13:06, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per all of the above. Someguy1221 17:36, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• Comment While I'm not familiar with how notable he is, I'd like to verify Wayne's assertion that there is no edit-war, and to clarify that there is no BLP-concern. Any concerns were dealt with/were in the process of being discussed. Tewfik^Talk 06:35, 8 May 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Fails notability. Torturous Devastating Cudgel 20:51, 9 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.