Talk:Merrill Keiser

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Ohio Portal Merrill Keiser is part of WikiProject Ohio, which collaborates on Ohio-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to current discussions.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Please rate this article, and then leave comments here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Suggested article edit guidelines: To help us prioritise our workload, and in readiness for Wikipedia:1.0, we need to assess our articles for Quality. If this article is Unassessed, please assess it. See the Article Classification for instructions. If you disagree with a rating, you can change it or discuss it at Article Classification. After assessing this article's quality, please make sure it to add it to the Lists at Article Classification, following the grading scheme detailed there.

This article was nominated for deletion on 17 July 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 14:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

I'm putting the phrase traditional values in quotes, because it's a pejorative, non-neutral POV term. The article in general is almost verbatim copied from portions of the website, with little editorial review. I'm going to help with this review... --Dbackeberg

[edit] Creationism, comments on abortion, comments on military deployment

I used the word creationism to describe his views because the word is used on his blog. The abortion quote and military deployment quote both came from the blog. I also added an internal link for strict constructionism.

I changed the reference from "our" forces to US forces;en-Wikipedia is supposed to be for all anglophones.--SuperWikiman 15:35, July 27 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Deletion

Why not delete this article now? The primary is over and this candidate is no longer active. Since there was no good reason to create this article, I say we should delete it now. 02:48, 19 August 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.225.89.251 (talk • contribs)

There already was a proposal to delete (see above), and it occurred AFTER the primary. John Broughton 13:30, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I think this article should be deleted. One argument made was since he was so far to the right, not just of Democrats, but Republicans, we should keep the article. The thing is, token conservative Democrats run in primaries against popular liberals all the time. As for the argument that he got a lot of national attention, that isn't true. There were a few local newspapers that covered him, but nothing other than small-time bloggers nationally.

Since the primary, the candidate has not been active in politics. He wasn't a serious candidate in the first place, so I say that this topic does not merit it's own article. 22 August 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian Murphy (talk • contribs)

You or anyone else is free to again initiate the formal process to evaluate whether the article should be deleted. I do note that many editors expect new arguments when a delete proposal is made for a second time, and nothing you've said seems to reach that threshold (to me, at least). For example, that Keiser has not been active in politics for the past month or two is not exactly definitive that something has changed since the July vote. Why not give the article six months or a year to see what happens next, if anything? (And proving a negative - that he hasn't been active - may be difficult.)John Broughton 14:54, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Time to delete this article

It's uncategorized and pertains to a primary that was over seven months ago. The page is never updated, and this guy is not in the news anymore, in any medium other than his own weblog, which is run by his friends, and does not even discuss his candidacy. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 164.107.214.143 (talk) 05:47, 7 December 2006 (UTC).

I say keep him if for humor value only. I like the hypocrisy in the fact he claims to be prolife yet advocates killing homosexuals. I love the contradiction.

BTW, it seems like it is autobiographical