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 speedy close; procedural: previous nomination was closed hours ago. `'mikka 00:09, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Essjay controversy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

The rationale for ths afd nom is intentionaly kept short.

I believe this article fails to meet Wikipedia:Notability and Wikipedia:Avoid self-references in the context of "Human Knowledge". Such an article should either be trasnwikied to meta.wiki or deleted completely. -- Cat ^chi? 23:59, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps it might be better to transwiki this to either meta or wikinews. -- Cat ^chi? 00:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that this article has a prior AfD that was closed less than 24 hours ago. —bbatsell ¿? ✍ 00:01, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong keep Disruptive nomination. Aren't there enough sources... [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] - Denny 00:03, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Strong keep Previous AfD was closed less than 24 hours ago. Clearly enough sources to assert notability. Maxamegalon2000 00:04, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Just speedy close this one... per the fact that the other AfD was just closed and showed a clear lack of consensus for the deletion of this article. (→Netscott) 00:05, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep, relist in a week or so if necessary. This is too soon. —xyzzy_n 00:07, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep. Article has received massive media attention throughout the world, including national television coverage in the U.S. Mutiple sources are listed in article for every assertion. Meets any reasonable notability guideline and adheres fully to WP:BLP. Casey Abell 00:07, 8 March 2007 (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.