 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
Don't delete page content on a whim!
editI have reverted the redirect to Babs.
Firstly this was a very badly done redirect, tantamount to blanking a page which is clearly recognised as a form of vandalism. This page had valuable content on it, and if the page's subject was declared non-notable after due process, it would be an appropriate situation for a merge. A merge is not the same as blanking and a redirect!
Secondly there's a process for deleting pages, which the editor of the redirect made no attempt to follow. No use of AfD, no time to develop consensus, not even any mention of it on the article's talk page. If I wasn't required to assume AGF, I'd see those same actions as sheer vandalism and page blanking. What else do we call unilateral deletion of an entire page's content?
Thirdly, this is a bio-stub, which is a legitimate form of page. The person named is a reasonable subject for an article in their own right. They restore historical cars, at a notably high level. There are other such people in that trade, with bios on wiki. That's not a case of WP:OSE, it's an indication that our consensus standard of notability for these craftsmen in that field is such as to include this person.
Obviously they're most notable for the Babs connection. That demonstrates their notability, but this isn't an example of a one-issue coathook article. This craftsmen worked on significant historical cars before Babs, and after Babs. They are notable even without Babs (although I concede that such content isn't cited here as yet).
They're also notable in their own right for the Babs connection, as a person whose activism caused Babs to be restored: a controversial decision locally, against the understandable wishes of many who preferred the wreckage to be left where it lay. Having been the driving force in that conflict is notable.
I would like to see this article expand, as there's scope for it. Even if Wiki, even if 5 minutes with Google, doesn't show it obviously. Even if this article doesn't expand though, it still meets all the criteria to survive. Andy Dingley (talk) 12:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
October 2008
editI HAVE BEEN TRYING TO EDIT THE FRONT PAGE< BUT THE EDITS KEEING BEING BLOCKED> THERE ARE SOME FACTUAL INACCURACIES ON THE PAGE BUT Flewis or who ever seems to block them. What a load of hassle _______________________________________- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.38.75.80 (talk) 11:23, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
- If you have evidence that something is wrong, cite evidence to support it. Andy Dingley (talk) 20:15, 31 October 2008 (UTC)