This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was No Consensus/Keep. Redwolf24 04:45, 24 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Non-notable (as I understand it; 800-1000 hits on Google, depending on search term} poet, page created by Dan Schnieder (user 69.9.96.108) as part of his vanity assaults (see also: WikiPedia:Votes for deletion/True Life). fuddlemark 18:21, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as per nominator. Sandstein 19:19, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Schneider may be guilty of vanity in promoting his article, but this poet clearly exists and as such is worthy of an entry - I was easily able to find some of his work online. Should be considered a stub. Dottore So 20:02, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. 900 google hits for a poet is rather high. Pburka 20:24, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
  • Merge and Redirect to James Emanuel per Alabamaboy. Pburka 00:45, August 15, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. The article is a stub but is about an important poet. The Google hit count should also take into count that this poet was mainly published before the internet age, so those 900 hits should count for more than a current poet with 900 hits. --Alabamaboy 20:44, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have rewritten the entry and eliminated the gratuitous vanity reference in the text.Dottore So 21:40, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Bad news people: This article already exists. See James Emanuel. I propose a redirect to this older article. I now will cut and paste the relevant, non-duplicating info to that article.--Alabamaboy 22:23, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I have now transfered the nonduplicate information. If a consensus arrives to turn this page into a redirect to James Emanuel, then let's do it.--Alabamaboy 22:28, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

• • Doh! I should have checked first. However, at least it spurred a content update, so in that regard the VfD was useful.Dottore So 22:39, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nice catch, Alabamaboy. I'd like to change my vote (if'n I had one in the first place) to redirect.--fuddlemark 22:44, 14 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep or merge. — BRIAN0918 • 2005-08-15 03:03
• Merge or redirect for obvious reasons. Martg76 22:26, 15 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]
• The consensus seems to be to redirect the page. I have now done this. --Alabamaboy 01:20, 21 August 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.