Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Levin (second nomination)

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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 Snowball Keep. Tawker 16:23, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Levin

edit

First nomination (2 January 2006)

Fails WP:BIO. Google test inconclusive, varied results. (The majority of the hits are his calls to help Freenode). WP does not have an article on the creator of DALnet, Dalvenjah, nor the original admin of EFnet, Greg Lindahl. Those networks have at times been much more popular (and are much more legendary in the IRC business) than Freenode. There is no reason to consider it as anything else. While Freenode more closely pushes its discussion topics toward GNU ideas and open-source software (including Wikimedia's IRC channels), it is still an IRC network like DALnet and EFnet are. It isn't notable enough to warrant anything other than an article about the network itself (which we have).

Page was a redirect to Peer-Directed Projects Center for a lengthy time, and the only reason for its resurrection into a non-WP:BIO article was his death. It has been resurrected several times in spite of the previous AfD, and the example containing the consensus of most editors for their reasoning is this:

Revision as of 09:42, 17 September 2006 (edit)

Stesch (Talk | contribs)
(Restoring page. There are currently many links pointing to this due to his recent death. Have a little respect, please.)

[1]

In the previous AfD debate, Rob himself told Ta bu shi da yu that an article about him wasn't notable. (The consensus of that Afd was delete.)

Links to the page are minimal and fixable. --JStalk 23:22, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Notice to participants: It has come to my attention that User:Stevenkaye created a page on Greg after I submitted this AfD. --JStalk 00:38, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy Keep I came to wikipedia when I heard the news to understand fully the significance. At a later date it may be appropriate to merge with an article about PDPC or Freenode, but at this time it is a useful and relevant page, and should be expanded, rather than deleted. His contribution goes beyond the creation of Freenode, because of the secondary effects of freenodes existence.--CatS 12:46, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep His death was widely reported, that's enough for. If people search for him, I want them to come here for the information, and not somewhere else. If the creators of the other channels get the same attention that he did, they should get articles too. If the article on PDPC doesn't link to him, it should. A strong moderate keep from me- Oskar 23:40, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Dying doesn't grant notability; my great-grandmother isn't in Wikipedia. He was only given attention for dying and asking people for donations for Freenode. Name something he contributed to computing other than Freenode. That's what this AfD is about, not "if we're top of the list in Google". --JStalk 23:47, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Was the death of your great-grandmother reported in the media (geek-media, whatever)? His death was reported on many, many sites. He sure got a lot of attention for someone that wasn't notable at all. That's enough for me. As an aside, (and note: this isn't my real argument at all, just an aside. If this was just anyone, I wouldn't use this argument for his bio being kept, but since he was notable...), do we have to follow policy so damned ridgidly? Come on, the guy just died, lets show him some respect from people who really respected him. We don't have to be cold, calculating policy/process machines all the time. Lets be a little human, for once. Oskar 23:58, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - If someone wasn't considered notable before his/her death, then he isn't made notable by dying (unless the death itself is notable, which in this case it's not) --Darksun 23:51, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • History suggests otherwise - many people have been considered more notable after their deaths than before them. Take Shakespeare. During his life, a small number of people were aware of his work and his existence, after his death, his plays were published by those who knew him, and the resulting effect on the English language is considerable. Not a valid argument for deletion. --CatS 13:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete personally I wish this hadn't come to an AfD, but whatever. I talked to Lilo many times on IRC, but let's be realistic... if this were an article about someone we didn't know, if it was just a "Guy was involved with X and died" story, there's no way we'd be arguing that met WP:BIO. This has nothing to do with liking or disliking Lilo, or not feeling bad about his death... a certain ammount of personal detachment is needed when deciding these things. --W.marsh 23:55, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh a redirect is fine with me, by the way. --W.marsh 23:56, 17 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
If this succeeds I'd like to see the redirect put back. But we don't really have AfR, and it is in essence a delete, so here we are. :) --JStalk 00:05, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep dying is not notable, starting a large irc network is notable. that you don't have ones for the other network originators, means the encyclopedia is lacking, not the accomplishment. if you were to have an encyclopedia of irc networks, would he be in it? --Buridan 00:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
on a related topic, we need a policy to stop people from posting deletes until a month after a death. because, posting and discussing it now, seem to me to be gauche, if not entirely passe. --Buridan 00:31, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
...unless the page was created because he died. --JStalk 00:41, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
it can still wait a month without harming wikipedia at all, while allowing emotional attachments to fade. it could be argued, that doing it immediately, will only yield a biased sample of those that loved or disliked, and because of that, it shouldn't be done for a month, once people have gained distance.--Buridan 00:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Owning one of the largest IRC networks is quite noteable. Because of his death, many people would like to know who he was and what he did. At least for now, we shouldn't delete the page so others know who he was. Mapletip 00:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Sure, there are other cases where similar occurrences don't have an entry in Wikipedia. But that's not a valid reason to delete this one; you have to start somewhere. As time goes by, lesser and lesser well known people will be mentioned in Wikipedia. This article has gathered a lot of attention and probably a number of links (I was pointed to it via IRC, for example). Removing it would serve no useful purpose. Groogle 01:08, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/Redirect into the PDPC page. As was stated above, only reason for re-creating ("resurrecting" is a bit of a loaded word in this context) seems to have been Levin's passing, which while unfortunate, does not necessitate some form of memorializing by "letting him have" a Wikipedia article. --PeruvianLlama(spit) 01:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep The main reason given for the previous deletion was misinterpreting Rob's self-deprecation as a declaration he was non-notable. Surely even the coldest rule-following deletionist can see that this is a non sequitur - I'm sure you'd vehemently oppose anyone self-claiming notability after all. That Rob's daily successful battle with trolls, spammers and rule-exploiters to keep freenode a place for civilised discourse online should be commemorated by this kind of pettifogging is ironic indeed. Kevin Marks 01:09, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep, death widely reported, and he was the founder of the freenode IRC network, which is quite significant. Possibly fits several WP:BIO categories:
...professionals whose work is widely recognized (for better or worse) and who are likely to become a part of the enduring historical record of that field.
Persons achieving renown or notoriety for their involvement in newsworthy events. —Pengo talk · contribs 02:18, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - notable. I have known of Rob Levin for a long time, and the arguments that he's not notable are completely nonpersuasive to me. Georgewilliamherbert 02:27, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - If he's notable to be in WikiNews, he's notable to be in Wikipedia. Not to mention that he started and operated a major IRC network depended on by numerous other notable organizations. njaard 03:21, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete/Redirect...His death being "widely reported" doesn't make him notable. Deaths of soldiers in Iraq are reported by much more mainstream news sources but they certainly aren't notable enough for a Wikipedia page. Owning an IRC network that a few thousand people use isn't notable enough for Wikipedia, as we correctly determined during the first AfD. His notability hasn't changed since then. VegaDark 04:48, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The death of each individual soldier is not given an article, Rob Levin's was. njaard 05:13, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - The fact that someone is self-deprecating enough to vote for their own deletion should not be considered here. The truth is that Rob made a large and lasting contribution to IRC, and deserves to be known for that. DrummondReed 04:53, September 2006 (UTC)
  • El k33p0, circumstances have changed significantly since the last AFD, and I do think it is now a service to our readers to talk about Rob Levin. We don't have a lack of verifiable sources, which is usually what would make me want to say "delete" on these borderline cases. --Cyde Weys 04:57, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - I just searched wiki wanting to know who he was, after seeing simply a mention of condolence to his family on Gentoo Linux's main page. It was useful to me. More generally, I have to agree that the fact the other network creators don't have entries is hardly a logical reason to delete here. Just points out articles that need written. If that line of reasoning is somewhere in policy, I'm glad it hasn't been around since the start... We'd never have had a first article. I can just see it now: "Foo is a thing. Nothing else has an article. Ergo Foo shouldn't have an article." Highly useful line of reasoning there. Hatchetfish 05:40, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Rob was somewhat famous in IRC circles, and should be noteable by the wikipedia. I'd support an expansion of the page. Gibbie99 06:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge/Redirect into the PDPC page. PDPC is relatively well-known, but outside of that network, Rob Levin really isn't. His death was tragic for certain, but Wikipedia can't become a list of obituaries for niche tech celebrities. A mention of who Rob Levin was and what he did for PDPC would be appropriate on the PDPC page itself, but the event is not notable or historically significant enough at this time for its own entry on Wiki. If PDPC winds up collapsing in on itself due to the loss of Levin, I would consider re-evaluating my position, but I don't see that happening. Lumbergh 06:54, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Freenode has been critical to the ability of many open source projects to collaborate; Rob was critical to Freenode. Perle 07:26, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Owen 07:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Always be wary if the subject asks for deletion, that's my guess. In this case, I guess he was just too modest. =) That said, Levin was probably well-enough known in IRC and open source circles in general to warrant an article of his own. Not a hugely influential person, but one whose name tends to stick in mind. --wwwwolf (barks/growls) 08:24, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - Recent media attention has made subject notable. Whether that fades or not only time will tell. - Stephanie Daugherty (Triona) - Talk - Comment - 09:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep Levin made Freenode, I think that's notable, right?
  • Keep Rob Levin, as well as the rest of past/present Freenode staff, put a lot of blood, sweat and tears into making Freenode what it is today. It has been said that he hasn't done much (if anything) for the Free/Open Source Software communities, which I would like to contest: the birth of OPN (now Freenode) gave many many projects a place where they could comminicate and collaborate in real-time, and of course a place where users and developers alike could converge. If that's not a significant contribution, I don't know what is... - beu 11:12, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Speedy keep for ridiculousness. If that's not process-oriented enough, keep per WP:SNOW - David Gerard 10:28, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Restore redirect. Subject individually, without any offence meant, isn't notable for dying in a car crash - we don't have articles on every victim of car accidents - and subject himself noted that he probably shouldn't have an article (see first nom). – Chacor 10:33, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to either Freenode or PDPC. Luigi30 (Taλk) 12:11, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Founder of huge IRC network. Notable enough. Zerbey 13:00, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. It is accurate information. Useful in context with freenode page. lucychili
  • Keep. Notable IRC network founder. — Pladask 15:20, 18 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. He was notable for his hard work, and various issues involving freedom, collaboration with FSF, etc.. Ultimately,the only way to judge what is or is not notable is if enough people interested. The very fact that people created this page and are voting for 'keep' points to the need to keep this. If his untimely death did contribute to the interest in this page, so be it. What matters is that enough people are interested.-- [User:deego]]
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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Rob_Levin_(second_nomination)&oldid=1138305967"