RationalWiki:Articles for deletion/Tim Eyman

Tim Eyman | Result: Keep and expand

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete

 * 1) Outdated and not particularly notable BeardOfZeus (talk) 23:52, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Poor quality and iffy notability. Andrew5 (talk) 00:27, 7 September 2021 (UTC) Changing to keep per editors below and other AFDs. Andrew5 (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) lacking notability chuck (talk) 18:47, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) He didn't really do that much to warrant an article about him here. He doesn't fit with any topic areas except politics, and even then is pretty weak. All there is to say about him is that he's a little crazy and inconsistent. So what? Jake Holmes''yell at me 18:50, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) I would vote keep per Bongolian since the rationale has merits on its own, but the article is in a such unpalatable state that it isn't worth keeping. In fact, this article is outright humiliating, especially if we compare it to Wikipedia's. If someone wants to make a new article on the guy, they can always use draftspace for that. Senioritas (talk) 19:22, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * That's what I'm saying - it has poor quality. I wouldn't be opposed, but I wouldn't support, a brand new article. Andrew5 (talk) 19:27, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Not convinced. 17:25, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) I would rather read Wikipedia's than this rubbish. 2A02:120B:2C60:8280:9818:2A69:A77C:F9B5 (talk) 18:27, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Keep

 * 1) He's got a long Wikipedai page ( he holds the record for number of qualified state-wide ballot measures in Washington. He's still active in politics, running for governor in 2020. He's an anti-tax advocate, and has been convicted of campaign finance crimes. Bongolian (talk) 19:07, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * My concern here is not notability, but quality. Never more then the current 1,608 bytes. If the quality cannot be improved, as it existed for over a decade, then that's more important then notability, IMO. Andrew5 (talk) 13:48, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 1) Per Bongolian. -- Techpriest (talk) 21:24, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 2) He does seem to be notable at least in Washington state. Plutocow (talk) 22:18, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 3) Per Bongolian. 𝒮𝑒𝓇𝑒𝓃𝑒  talk  12:29, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 4) Severely in need of expansion, but otherwise worth keeping. Looking at the Wikipedia page Bongolian linked to, there should be enough material to make it relevant for RW as well. 19:48, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 5) -Flandres (talk) 22:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 6) If it's a bad, but on-mission, article then the solution is to fix it - not delete it.Bob"Life is short and (insert adjective)" 14:04, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
 * 7) Bob has finally convinced me. I'll see what I can do to expand it. Andrew5 (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

Merge/redirect

 * 1) Look, I know this guy is a nobody, but the text could be merged into another article focusing on less notable politicians.  12:16, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * What article? Christopher (talk) 12:21, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Wasn't there an article titled something like "RationalWiki:Webshites"? Which would make a short mention of some nobody who is pretty awful? I don't know if there's such an article focusing on politics, but it could always be made and titled "RationalWiki:ShitPolitics". 13:04, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * The problem is, though, is that making a new page would require other merges, and possibly some deleted articles might have to be brought back. I personally don’t see a merger being an upside. Andrew5 mobile (talk) 16:24, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * A ShitPolitics article would be a fucking disaster. -- Techpriest (talk) 21:25, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
 * So does an article titled "Webshite", the chicken coop and a social hangout only page called "saloon bar" which attracts all sorts of weird folks, but no one speaks up about them. 21:59, 8 September 2021 (UTC)

Goat

 * 1) Could a possible compromise be to move to draft space? It would remove quality issues and not totally delete it. Either that, or move to fun space. Andrew5 (talk) 21:56, 13 September 2021 (UTC) Nvm.Andrew5 (talk) 16:43, 16 September 2021 (UTC)