Wikipedia talk:Miscellany for deletion/User:GabrielF/ConspiracyNoticeboard

message: Please respond to the reason for not supporting the Afd. Instead of attacking indivual editors, in violation of WP:NPA. Travb (talk) 11:51, 30 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Just figured that out. Nevermind. Crockspot 16:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

text: I'll bring it up with my Illuminati masters. They're all Rothschilds and De Beers' so I think they can spring for it.GabrielF 05:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Please see WP:No personal attacks.  The only "boards" I belong to on Wikipedia are Wikipedians who play computer and video games, WikiProject Computer and video games members, and Wikipedians interested in anime and manga.  That's it.  Is this some kind of personal attack?  Morton devonshire 03:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's light years away from bing a personal attack. You have dozens of posts to the board, and answered Derex, on that board, using 'us' and 'we'. "If you notice the Afds, you will see that each of us..." "Notice that we're NOT nominating articles..." Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Um, given that she pretty clearly fails WP:BIO, this is less than persuasive. Is this the worst example you can construct? JoshuaZ 01:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fails BIO? Kathleen Christison in WAPO --Christison's publications on Amazon -- Kathleen Christianson + CIA  Fairness And Accuracy For All 02:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If she's so inherently notable, how come nobody challenged the AfD? GabrielF 02:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll let the admins judge if it was a good faith nomination, or  agenda driven. Did you post an RFC to get feedback from the HUNDREDS of Wikipedians who are primarily interested in Israel-Palestine issues? - Oops, I was wrong - she has 3 books and 5 other published works available on Amazon. Christison's publications on Amazon Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not a WAPO article, its a question and answer session. I am sure if you called Washington Post you would most likely find its a seperate group that handles the content of an online Q&A then handles choosing articles for the website. I also do not see her mentioned in many sources for views, so you can write to your hearts content, but if noone cares ... well your still not notable. I wold also like to note as Gabriel said, if she is, and her views, so notable, why did noone oppose? Better yet how much of that information was in the article? I will tell you, none of it. You can view the cache on google if you know how to search for it.  You should research your examples better as they arent working out too well so far. You also turned this MfD into a mess. --NuclearZer0 03:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry but radical CIA officer doesnt satisfy WP:BIO, but thats another issue. The Learning Annex is having a convention with "Power Earner Guru's" giving speeches, people who give them all over the continental US ... do I really need to finish, should we give them all articles? Again the article did not establish notability, if you felt it did, you should have chimed in. You can see the link I provided above and review if you feel the article presented notability. --NuclearZer0 03:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here's her WAPO BIO from 2001, and she has become even more notable since then. "Formerly, Christison worked as a political analyst with the CIA, dealing first with Vietnam for several years and then with the Middle East for her last seven years with the Agency before resigning in 1979. Since leaving the CIA, she has been a free-lance writer, dealing primarily with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her book, "Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on U.S. Middle East Policy," was published in 1999 by the University of California Press, and was reissued in paperback with an update in October 2001. A second book, "The Wound of Dispossession: Telling the Palestinian Story," was published in August 2001. She has published articles in Foreign Policy magazine, the Christian Science Monitor, two encyclopedias on the Middle East, and several Middle East journals, as well as book reviews in newspapers throughout the country, including the Washington Post." Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not a WAPO bio its a description before the Q&A. Lets not try to prop that up to more then it is. --NuclearZer0 11:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: PS you may want to remove your list above, its starting to seem McCarthy like. --NuclearZer0 03:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's YOUR list, not mine. Conspiracy Board's ≈Votes on Christison AfD Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean the one you tagging people as board members. Stop trying to label people. I think Derex made a comment that when you run out of points to argue you start talking about the people ... hmm ... --NuclearZer0 11:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All anyone has to do is look at the page's history, and they'll come up with the exact same list as mine. I encourage the admins to do so. Fairness And Accuracy For All 19:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Change to Neutral Oops, found out the Christisons were analysts, of which there are many, not case officers.  --Blainster 21:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems the more outrageous your conspiracy theory grows the more people who look at this MfD as something more then a simply MfD. You may want to consider toning down you approach. --NuclearZer0 19:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't suprise me in the least that a member of the Conspiracy Theory board sees an effort to document their actions as a Conspiracy Theory! Do I need to be afraid of the 'New World Order', too? Fairness And Accuracy For All 19:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not really sure what you are refering to at this point. You keep attempting to prove there is a conspiracy here to delete articles ... However it seems you will not be taking my advice and instead be going further off on a tangent. --NuclearZer0 19:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Request denied. Guy 22:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: moved from Afd

message: "Wikipedia:Articles for deletes/Kathleen Christison - wife of William Christison, with 1/5th the notability!" Nominated by board member Aaron - 12 Oct 2006 Kathleen Christianson
She's an author, lecturer, ex CIA Analyst (16 yrs) and a vocal critic of Israel and the US's support of Israel. She wrote several books. Even I (admittedly a progressive liberal) don't agree with many of her views, and find some of them objectionable. Non-notable?  89,500 GHITS for "Kathleen Christison" + CIA. Numerous inclusionable third-party mentions. 
PROD for AFD by Aaron (board member)<BR>
Delete by GabrialF (board founder and member) - I created the page but labeling me a board member is misleading GabrielF 13:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll bring it up with my Illuminati masters. They're all Rothschilds and De Beers' so I think they can spring for it.GabrielF 05:22, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Please see WP:No personal attacks.  The only "boards" I belong to on Wikipedia are Wikipedians who play computer and video games, WikiProject Computer and video games members, and Wikipedians interested in anime and manga.  That's it.  Is this some kind of personal attack?  Morton devonshire 03:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's light years away from bing a personal attack. You have dozens of posts to the board, and answered Derex, on that board, using 'us' and 'we'. "If you notice the Afds, you will see that each of us..." "Notice that we're NOT nominating articles..." Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:42, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Um, given that she pretty clearly fails WP:BIO, this is less than persuasive. Is this the worst example you can construct? JoshuaZ 01:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Fails BIO? Kathleen Christison in WAPO --Christison's publications on Amazon -- Kathleen Christianson + CIA  Fairness And Accuracy For All 02:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If she's so inherently notable, how come nobody challenged the AfD? GabrielF 02:18, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll let the admins judge if it was a good faith nomination, or  agenda driven. Did you post an RFC to get feedback from the HUNDREDS of Wikipedians who are primarily interested in Israel-Palestine issues? - Oops, I was wrong - she has 3 books and 5 other published works available on Amazon. Christison's publications on Amazon Fairness And Accuracy For All 03:00, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not a WAPO article, its a question and answer session. I am sure if you called Washington Post you would most likely find its a seperate group that handles the content of an online Q&A then handles choosing articles for the website. I also do not see her mentioned in many sources for views, so you can write to your hearts content, but if noone cares ... well your still not notable. I wold also like to note as Gabriel said, if she is, and her views, so notable, why did noone oppose? Better yet how much of that information was in the article? I will tell you, none of it. You can view the cache on google if you know how to search for it.  You should research your examples better as they arent working out too well so far. You also turned this MfD into a mess. --NuclearZer0 03:38, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Sorry but radical CIA officer doesnt satisfy WP:BIO, but thats another issue. The Learning Annex is having a convention with "Power Earner Guru's" giving speeches, people who give them all over the continental US ... do I really need to finish, should we give them all articles? Again the article did not establish notability, if you felt it did, you should have chimed in. You can see the link I provided above and review if you feel the article presented notability. --NuclearZer0 03:57, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Here's her WAPO BIO from 2001, and she has become even more notable since then. "Formerly, Christison worked as a political analyst with the CIA, dealing first with Vietnam for several years and then with the Middle East for her last seven years with the Agency before resigning in 1979. Since leaving the CIA, she has been a free-lance writer, dealing primarily with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Her book, "Perceptions of Palestine: Their Influence on U.S. Middle East Policy," was published in 1999 by the University of California Press, and was reissued in paperback with an update in October 2001. A second book, "The Wound of Dispossession: Telling the Palestinian Story," was published in August 2001. She has published articles in Foreign Policy magazine, the Christian Science Monitor, two encyclopedias on the Middle East, and several Middle East journals, as well as book reviews in newspapers throughout the country, including the Washington Post." Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:13, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Its not a WAPO bio its a description before the Q&A. Lets not try to prop that up to more then it is. --NuclearZer0 11:06, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: PS you may want to remove your list above, its starting to seem McCarthy like. --NuclearZer0 03:59, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's YOUR list, not mine. Conspiracy Board's ≈Votes on Christison AfD Fairness And Accuracy For All 04:04, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I mean the one you tagging people as board members. Stop trying to label people. I think Derex made a comment that when you run out of points to argue you start talking about the people ... hmm ... --NuclearZer0 11:08, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: All anyone has to do is look at the page's history, and they'll come up with the exact same list as mine. I encourage the admins to do so. Fairness And Accuracy For All 19:12, 31 October 2006 (UTC)

text: Change to Neutral Oops, found out the Christisons were analysts, of which there are many, not case officers.  --Blainster 21:37, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It seems the more outrageous your conspiracy theory grows the more people who look at this MfD as something more then a simply MfD. You may want to consider toning down you approach. --NuclearZer0 19:11, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It doesn't suprise me in the least that a member of the Conspiracy Theory board sees an effort to document their actions as a Conspiracy Theory! Do I need to be afraid of the 'New World Order', too? Fairness And Accuracy For All 19:49, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I am not really sure what you are refering to at this point. You keep attempting to prove there is a conspiracy here to delete articles ... However it seems you will not be taking my advice and instead be going further off on a tangent. --NuclearZer0 19:51, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: One particular case with documentation

message: Morton Devonshire has now recreated this board in his user space. He is the second board member to have done so. 
Conspiracy Noticeboard The Morton Devoshire edition
I request that this page, and the other mirror be speedy deleted immediately until this issue is settled.
Fairness And Accuracy For All 20:28, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Request denied. Guy 22:52, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Morton Devoshire has now recreated the board in his user space