Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Shankbone
I won't quibble with the fact that this subject technically passes the |general notability guideline. He does, but not by nearly as much as some are suggesting, and almost no one here is denying that Shankbone's notability is marginal. Were he to ask for deletion, we would almost certainly oblige him, and it's a damn shame he has not done that because: A) Given Shankbone's "controversial" (for lack of a better word) persona here on Wikipedia, the article will (indeed has) inevitably come under BLP attack, and we have unfortunately demonstrated that we cannot at the moment necessarily protect marginal BLPs from defamation; B) Simply discussing and working on the article, discussing it here at AfD, and discussing and dealing with it for years to come will take up an inordinate amount of energy, particularly for a barely notable BLP which is, to be blunt, not particularly important to Wikipedia. So on the one hand you can call this a "far more trouble then it's worth, let's apply some common sense here" delete !vote. I would also invoke the spirit but not the letter of the Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Badlydrawnjeff#Summary_deletion_of_BLPs|summary deletion of BLPs principle from a 2007 ArbCom case. There is a precedent for going somewhat out of process when it comes to BLPs and I think that should be applied here. Arguably we should not have marginally notable BLPs ''at all'', but I certainly think we should delete such BLPs when we ''know'' (and we do know, because it has http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Shankbone&action=historysubmit&diff=321633657&oldid=321608143 already http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=David_Shankbone&diff=next&oldid=321634769 happened) that we are going to have difficulty keeping defamatory edits out. Rather than wasting further time and resources (and I think we all know that's what will happen, probably in both the short and long run) worrying and arguing about this article that few outside Wikipedia would give a whit about, let's delete it for the sake of the encyclopedia and David's own sake. I only wish he would request deletion for those same reasons, as that would likely make this AfD a foregone conclusion and save us a lot of trouble. I hope the closing admin considers factors beyond notability here, as  is not the only community norm relevant to this discussion
— User:Bigtimepeace, 21:19, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Notability)