168:- While the stated purpose of this AfD as a discussion of a merge is decidedly odd and may be misuse of the AfD process, I think that there is sufficient question as to the notability of the subject to warrant this AfD, irrespective of the outcome of previous AfDs. It is odd that an AfD is being brought by a nom that thinks the article should be kept and, again, I wonder if it is a misuse of the process. It might be more appropriate if this AfD were resubmitted by an editor that feels that the article should be deleted and perhaps this AfD should be "shelved" pending such a submittal. --
670:; it is true that most of Hausherr's notability derives primarily from his anti-Scientology campaigning. However, as per Iridescenti's point above, the fact that his program has received notable coverage as well means that a simple redirect would be inappropriate. I also applaud Mr. Hausherr for handling this in the proper fashion and avoiding
960:
notable a living person has to be in order to be "notable", beyond being the subject of verifiable published references. Knowledge includes hundreds of articles on minor and ephemeral figures in the worlds of sport and entertainment; considering Tilman's conspicuous presence on the web over the past
308:
To be fair though, since he did include the name "Xenu's" I understand why some
Scientologists may feel he is a full time critic. However such people are most likely forgetting that the bulk of time spent on the application involves programming/coding, the name is almost an afterthought. (Which means
833:
That I had to go offsite for a breakdown of that tasteless little piece of internet history is only proof that I'm on the right track. Citing a 'non-notable' subject to prove why things are notable and not-notable? Please tie my brain in a knot, now. No, don't explain. I don't want to be clear!
730:-NOT merge- and desperately ask for vandalism protection. I don't know anything about Tilmann Hausherr besides what the article points to, but from all the discussion I've seen, he must be a Golden God for warranting so much hostile attention. I read the conversations and gape incredulously. ^O^
629:
Gosh, ok: "Non-notable critic of
Scientology with a couple of minor mentions and no relevance on whatever happens with Scientology in the world. He is also a Non-notable developer of one bit of non-notable software which he is not even trying to sell." Likes cats, which is notable and nice, but not
819:
of wikipedia. For all I know, Mr. Hausherr, having only 5 Yahoo hits, might be a figment of our imagination, or a very important figure in understanding the methods of
Scientology against its critics. Only time will tell. There is plenty of time to decide whether he deserves enshrinenment as a
932:- Xenu Link Sleuth is popular free software for findng broken URLs on web pages. The subject's personal web site is also an information resource about cults in the German language, as well as in English. I note also there is nothing in the WP article about the OPC or harming tourism, thus no
301:
were only a critic of
Scientology, I'd agree with the merge proposal. After all, he would belong in such a category if that was all that could be known for. In my opinion his software development and the coverage it has received clearly makes him notable for more than being a Scientology
865:
Please come out of the corner, Claude. Look, I have a cookie. Don't you want the cookie? Good, while you enjoy the cookie, let me mention that Mr. Peppers is reknowned in
Knowledge lore for the amount of digital "ink" generated here over whether he should have an article. You can Google
783:
hardly applies for a second reason; not only was there no real bite, there is no real newcomer. The only thing real here, Mr. Smee, is your inappropriate and mettlesome "warning". Hold on, Mr. Smee. Weren't you warned about not picking fights with me?
240:-- As nom, I will not "vote" a particular sentiment, though I do think the subject is notable and the article is certainly adequately sourced with reputable secondary sourced citations. However I will state that this action of the merge discussion at
183:- No, actually it is a used practice to send an article you think is notable to AFD, in order to "test" its notability as a standalone article. This is most certainly appropriate, specifically because "Merge" discussions commonly take place
985:: as others have said, notability has been estabilished in more than one area, so a simple merger is not appropriate. Breaking up the information into articles on the separate subjects would make it harder to determine who Hausherr is. -
903:. It is adequately sourced, and the notability has been fully shown. There's also notability in other fields. Just as it is unfair to lump all scientologists into the same group, so it is unfair to do the same with the opponents.
515:
is notable for being the first to promote the criticism of another person's religion by means of naming an unrelated software program (I will spare you the analogies I can dream up) but I doubt that we will find RS crediting
461:
It was likely featured in PC-Welt magazine sometime in fall 2006, since they asked me for permission. Your "five years ago" theory is because that was all you could find. I suggest you look further, and also at google print.
341:, he is notable in the anti-cult world, and the article is adequately sourced from third party publications. I'd argue that the article is keepable on this basis alone, irrespective of the notability of Hausherr's software.
444:- Non-notable critic of Scientology with a couple of minor mentions; also he has a website and a lawyer sent him a letter (dime a dozen). Non-notable developer of one bit of non-notable software that got a magazine mention
489:
646:
Is notable enough to have a fair few pages linking to him, and since the article (briefly) covers both his work as a software developer and as an anti-Scientology campaigner, a merge to either would be confusing.
136:
359:-- no new arguments that weren't already examined and rejected in the first two AfDs, which frankly makes this seem quite like an attempt to get around the results of the first two AfDs. --
244:, and the placing of the merge tags at the 2 associated articles and the constant re-adding of them amounts to a revenge/harassment tactic, as delineated by the subject of the article,
52:
896:
Let's discuss the article, not each other. Notable scientologists are appropriate subjects for WP articles.So are notable opponents. This article is about a particularly effective
739:
Does this mean that our new notability standard is "Amount of talk page discussion and dispute". Then I guess Brian
Peppers deserves to be enshrined on the Knowledge home page as
452:
is abundantly pointed out by the fact that, other than the five-year old magazine mention, the main "source" to establish notability is of the sort; "someone actually used it". --
491:. These books mention the shareware that is relevant, i.e. notable. The hit counter (which is administered by the ISP software, not by me) of the Xenu page is at over a million.
241:
148:
824:
Mr. Hausherr. For myself, it is only day 17. I find comparisons between
Hausherr and misshapenly and developmentally disabled sex offenders to be ROFL amusing but a highly
766:
Mr. Reigns is employing a bit of sarcasm himself. Why not warn him, too? (Just a joke, Claude, I don't mind just so long as you are willing to get as much as you give) --
110:
941:
479:. These sorts of books list tons of programs for web design and maintenance; often including a CD chock full of freeware and shareware. Not particularly notable. --
144:
132:
599:. Since I've been active in several fields, it is ridiculous to merge the article in the "cult opposition" article, which does not even have a "people" section. --
373:
Why would you propose a deletion (AFD) to settle a merge debate. Wouldn't a merge be prefereable to a deletion? I still support a merge with a redirect from
476:(Tilman added a Google Books search to his existing comment so I will speak to that) Add Xenu to the search as in Xenu+"Link Sleuth" and you get five hits
695:
I certainly don't think a merge is appropriate. There is at least some verifiable information that shows that subject is notable in more than one field.
802:
753:
503:
The page illustrates my point - non-notable software in a sea of similar non-notable software. The hit counter is illustrative of the synergy
870:
for a taste. That is why I mention him in reply to the specious argument that the amount of chatter here has anything to do with anything. --
815:
What's sarcasm? :D Is there an agp talk page?? :| No, really, I'm determined to learn more about Tilman (one l) Hausherr. Please observe my
463:
201:
It was indeed a clever move and I support it. If the article survives this AfD, I hope that it will stop similar moves once and for all. --
49:
961:
decade, he is surely more notable than some of these. Knowledge has a role in answering questions like "Who is Tilman
Hausherr, anyway?"
867:
820:
cultbuster or urban legend. Sweeping information under our electronic rug will not serve either such purpose. Please allow me time to
83:
78:
214:
That would be the intention - to have a referendum once and for all on whether to Keep, or Merge or Delete the article in question...
87:
989:
977:
965:
948:
944:
since the subject is just as notable for Xenu Link Sleuth as he is for publishing data about cults which pretend to be religions.
924:
912:
874:
860:
841:
809:
788:
770:
760:
747:
734:
704:
687:
662:
634:
624:
615:
603:
578:
568:
552:
543:
528:
498:
483:
469:
456:
427:
418:
400:
388:
363:
351:
333:
281:
252:
218:
205:
191:
172:
155:
588:
I am Tilman
Hausherr, so no vote. The orginal merge request was made in bad faith and is part of a campaign against me, examples:
70:
683:
17:
548:
I am not allowed to edit my own article. I am thankful for others who do, and who make constructive changes and additions. --
295:
and I have worked/are working together this isn't a formal vote, even though an AfD isn't supposed to be a "vote" anyway.
382:
564:
Tilman, according to policy, you can provide the information, links and documentation so someone else can edit it
1004:
396:, if you feel that the article should be merged, then you should change your sentiment from "Keep" to "Merge."
36:
1003:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
381:. I am not very familiar with AFDs. I don't know what this means for the merge, but in order to be fair go to
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
539:
Tilman, I am simply basing that on the article as is appropriate. If there is more notability then add it. --
565:
415:
393:
385:
360:
649:
477:
305:
Hausherr's Xenu's Link Sleuth software was called the "fastest link-checking software" by PC Magazine.
836:
not all projects should have pictures attached. *trembles in corner* this is why we call it abuse....
267:
74:
921:
151:. This AFD will serve to formally discuss the appropriateness or lack thereof of any such "Merge."
449:
378:
383:
http://en.wikipedia.org/Talk:Opposition_to_cults_and_new_religious_movements#Tilman_Hausherr_merge
712:, propaganda, but a week delete ;-)... Although I think Tilman as a close circle of friends or a
277:
524:'s reprehensible attempts to blacklist and cause trouble for ordinary public Scientologists.) --
974:
857:
838:
821:
816:
779:; it is clear to me that he is no newcomer and that is equally obvious from his post here. So
731:
700:
679:
575:
346:
309:
if a person spends 100 hours developing a program, and then takes two seconds to call it the
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
716:, having an article on Knowledge can only help increase someone's responsibility and this is
871:
847:
785:
767:
744:
621:
540:
525:
480:
453:
169:
797:, the first edit was less than 20 days ago. Therefore this is a new user. Therefore please
488:
There are different ways to write "Xenu's", that is why. Some don't write His name at all:
962:
521:
517:
512:
504:
298:
262:
66:
58:
780:
330:
937:
798:
721:
671:
933:
696:
675:
342:
143:
Recently, a discussion was brought up to merge the entire article into the article
831:
520:
with that "honor" anyway. (Not to mention the software and this article promoting
104:
945:
936:
exists to support this commonly spammed libel about the subject. Article meets
600:
549:
495:
466:
292:
245:
202:
986:
631:
612:
806:
757:
492:
424:
397:
249:
215:
188:
152:
620:
Misou, please provide a reason or your "vote" will carry no weight. Thanks.
907:
374:
830:
personal attack against the alleged Mr. Hausherr. Brian
Peppers
997:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
508:
940:. Finally, it is inappropriate to merge this article into
48:. Please defer merge related discussion to article talk.
261:
subject is notable for other things than cult opposition
507:
developed by linking unrelated software to the internet
794:
776:
775:
Besides, Mr. Smee, looking at Mr. Reign's edit history
597:
595:
593:
591:
589:
574:
Yes, glad to help to expand the article with more RSes
423:
No prob, wasn't sure if you knew you could do that...
121:
100:
96:
92:
131:
This article previously survived 2 AFDs. In both the
448:(again both are dime a dozen). The non-notability of
325:
to be called a developer. Especially if the software
242:
Talk:Opposition to cults and new religious movements
149:
Talk:Opposition to cults and new religious movements
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1007:). No further edits should be made to this page.
942:Opposition to cults and new religious movements
145:Opposition to cults and new religious movements
8:
920:and what is this person notable for again?--
803:Knowledge:Please do not bite the newcomers
754:Knowledge:Please do not bite the newcomers
743:instead of deleted and salted forever. --
850:for putting that image in my head! Ok,
7:
846:Still... barfing... someone punish
24:
319:be called insensitive but would
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
50:Can't sleep, clown will eat me
1:
793:Looking at the ClaudeReigns
1024:
990:00:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
978:08:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
966:03:31, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
949:08:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
925:04:56, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
913:23:46, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
875:18:38, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
861:18:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
842:18:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
810:16:45, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
789:16:41, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
771:16:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
761:16:25, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
748:14:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
741:Permanent Featured Article
735:14:44, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
724:11:05, 21 March 2007 (GMT)
705:01:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
688:01:17, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
663:22:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
635:02:13, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
625:20:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
616:18:31, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
604:17:02, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
579:17:28, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
569:17:01, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
553:17:21, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
544:17:07, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
529:22:27, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
511:of Xenu. I do not know if
499:22:17, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
484:21:56, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
470:21:46, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
457:16:54, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
428:16:57, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
419:16:55, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
401:21:18, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
389:15:25, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
364:14:26, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
352:12:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
334:10:28, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
312:no FAT chicks file manager
282:10:00, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
253:07:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
219:18:52, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
206:18:51, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
192:18:16, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
173:17:05, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
156:07:40, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
53:01:30, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
161:Comments on nom statement
1000:Please do not modify it.
166:Comment on nom statement
147:. The discussion is at
32:Please do not modify it.
752:Cut out the sarcasm.
720:needed in that case --
307:
973:per DGG and Orsini.
801:, and stop violating
630:for an encyclopedia.
394:User:John196920022001
303:
795:contribution history
127:Nomination statement
379:Opposition to cults
450:Xenu's Link Sleuth
187:AFD discussions.
139:- the result was
911:
799:assume good faith
349:
296:
279:
1015:
1002:
904:
856:I'm kidding. :D
661:
659:
654:
566:John196920022001
416:John196920022001
386:John196920022001
361:Antaeus Feldspar
347:
290:
278:
275:
274:
271:
265:
108:
90:
34:
1023:
1022:
1018:
1017:
1016:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1005:deletion review
998:
956:It's not clear
837:
655:
650:
648:
522:Tilman Hausherr
518:Tilman Hausherr
513:Tilman Hausherr
505:Tilman Hausherr
299:Tilman Hausherr
272:
269:
268:
263:
81:
67:Tilman Hausherr
65:
62:
59:Tilman Hausherr
44:The result was
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1021:
1019:
1010:
1009:
993:
992:
980:
968:
951:
927:
915:
891:
890:
889:
888:
887:
886:
885:
884:
883:
882:
881:
880:
879:
878:
877:
844:
835:
725:
707:
690:
665:
641:
640:
639:
638:
637:
606:
582:
581:
562:
561:
560:
559:
558:
557:
556:
555:
537:
536:
535:
534:
533:
532:
531:
446:five years ago
438:
437:
436:
435:
434:
433:
432:
431:
407:
406:
405:
404:
367:
366:
354:
336:
315:, said person
284:
256:
232:AFD discussion
229:
228:
227:
226:
225:
224:
223:
222:
209:
208:
196:
195:
120:AFD started:
118:
117:
114:
61:
56:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1020:
1008:
1006:
1001:
995:
994:
991:
988:
984:
981:
979:
976:
972:
969:
967:
964:
959:
955:
952:
950:
947:
943:
939:
935:
931:
928:
926:
923:
919:
916:
914:
910:
909:
902:
899:
895:
892:
876:
873:
869:
864:
863:
862:
859:
855:
854:
849:
845:
843:
840:
832:
829:
828:
827:inappropriate
823:
818:
814:
813:
811:
808:
804:
800:
796:
792:
791:
790:
787:
782:
778:
774:
773:
772:
769:
765:
764:
762:
759:
755:
751:
750:
749:
746:
742:
738:
737:
736:
733:
729:
726:
723:
719:
715:
711:
708:
706:
702:
698:
694:
691:
689:
685:
681:
677:
673:
669:
666:
664:
660:
658:
653:
645:
642:
636:
633:
628:
627:
626:
623:
619:
618:
617:
614:
611:
607:
605:
602:
598:
596:
594:
592:
590:
587:
584:
583:
580:
577:
573:
572:
571:
570:
567:
554:
551:
547:
546:
545:
542:
538:
530:
527:
523:
519:
514:
510:
506:
502:
501:
500:
497:
493:
490:
487:
486:
485:
482:
478:
475:
474:
473:
472:
471:
468:
464:
460:
459:
458:
455:
451:
447:
443:
440:
439:
429:
426:
422:
421:
420:
417:
413:
412:
411:
410:
409:
408:
402:
399:
395:
392:
391:
390:
387:
384:
380:
376:
372:
369:
368:
365:
362:
358:
355:
353:
350:
348:(squirt ink?)
344:
340:
337:
335:
332:
328:
324:
323:
318:
314:
313:
306:
300:
294:
288:
285:
283:
280:
276:
266:
260:
257:
254:
251:
247:
243:
239:
236:
235:
234:
233:
220:
217:
213:
212:
211:
210:
207:
204:
200:
199:
198:
197:
193:
190:
186:
182:
179:
178:
177:
176:
175:
174:
171:
167:
163:
162:
158:
157:
154:
150:
146:
142:
138:
134:
129:
128:
124:
123:
122:20 March 2007
115:
112:
106:
102:
98:
94:
89:
85:
80:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
60:
57:
55:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
999:
996:
982:
975:Robertissimo
970:
957:
953:
929:
917:
906:
900:
897:
893:
858:ClaudeReigns
852:
851:
839:ClaudeReigns
826:
825:
756:. Thanks.
740:
732:ClaudeReigns
727:
717:
713:
709:
692:
667:
656:
651:
643:
609:
585:
576:ClaudeReigns
563:
445:
441:
414:OK, thanks.
370:
356:
338:
326:
321:
320:
316:
311:
310:
304:
286:
258:
237:
231:
230:
184:
180:
165:
164:
160:
159:
140:
130:
126:
125:
119:
45:
43:
31:
28:
872:Justanother
848:Justanother
786:Justanother
768:Justanother
745:Justanother
728:Strong keep
622:Justanother
541:Justanother
526:Justanother
481:Justanother
454:Justanother
246:User:Tilman
170:Justanother
963:DavidCooke
817:philosophy
805:. Thanks.
135:, and the
954:Weak keep
922:Sefringle
898:proponent
693:Weak keep
668:Weak keep
644:Weak keep
608:Yawn....
331:Anynobody
181:Response:
133:first AFD
901:opponent
722:Jpierreg
238:COMMENT:
111:View log
781:WP:BITE
697:Vivaldi
676:Krimpet
586:Comment
343:Squiddy
302:critic.
287:COMMENT
137:2nd AFD
84:protect
79:history
946:Orsini
938:WP:BLP
918:Delete
718:highly
710:Delete
684:review
672:WP:COI
652:Irides
610:Delete
601:Tilman
550:Tilman
496:Tilman
467:Tilman
442:Delete
375:Tilman
293:Tilman
291:Since
273:Jester
203:Tilman
185:within
88:delete
987:Aleta
934:WP:RS
657:centi
632:Misou
613:Misou
371:Merge
327:works
317:could
289:Keep
141:Keep.
116:Note.
105:views
97:watch
93:links
16:<
983:Keep
971:Keep
930:Keep
894:Keep
868:here
807:Smee
777:here
758:Smee
714:club
701:talk
680:talk
674:. —
509:meme
425:Smee
398:Smee
357:Keep
339:Keep
322:have
270:SWAT
259:Keep
250:Smee
216:Smee
189:Smee
153:Smee
101:logs
75:talk
71:edit
46:keep
958:how
908:DGG
853:now
822:eat
377:to
329:.)
297:If
248:.
109:– (
812:.
784:--
763:.
703:)
686:)
494:--
465:--
345:|
103:|
99:|
95:|
91:|
86:|
82:|
77:|
73:|
905:—
699:(
682:/
678:(
430:.
403:.
264:⇒
255:.
221:.
194:.
113:)
107:)
69:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.