Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Seanbaby

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 of the debate was keep. Mailer Diablo 02:02, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seanbaby

Delete; there is nothing substantial or noteworthy about this obscure individual that would necessitate their inclusion in an encyclopedic reference. There are millions of other entertainment journalists out there and hundreds of millions of people with their own website -- they all can't have an entry in the Wikipedia. The article is most likely a vanity page as the subject of the article or one of his "fans" created the article to boost his noteriety. Please read Wikipedia:Vanity_guidelines for further clarification. -- updated: Stereoisomer 23:42, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. There is a difference between new sites that haven't developed a readership yet, and well-known, established sites that aren't updating much anymore. Once established, sites shouldn't stop being notable any more than authors stop being notable when their books become less popular. They're part of the historical fabric. · rodii · 21:26, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. His numerous televsion appearances on major networks give him notability. Cdcon 21:57, 25 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep. This guy is definitely an internet phenomenon and this page is well-written and fairly complete, informative and not especially biased. No way it should be deleted. -- Arvedui 00:15, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Television appearances, fairly widely published writing, formerly popular website. This article isn't doing much to promote him, by any means. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:20, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Even wikipedia thinks he's notable since 14 other articles link here (excluding talk and (my) user pages). --Aranae 05:51, 26 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep.His page is obviously quite a few cuts above being anything like average and he's also well known for his "Wave" articles, amongst other things. The fact that he has a page on Wiki just proves his popularity more than anything else. There is no shortage of other popular writer/journalists who also have their own pages.
Strong keep Obscure?!? Seanbaby is *extremely* well-known and notable, and has been that way since before Wikipedia, or even the wiki concept itself, was thought of. Turnstep 15:11, 27 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Absurd--Seanbaby is part of the net. The person who nominated this entry for deletion is obviously angry about something.
Strong Keep Magazines, TV, the internet...this is about as clear cut as they come. --InShaneee 05:10, 28 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

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.