Ben Breedlove Options

[melloden]

Ben Breedlove (T-H-L-K-D), posthumous YouTube celebrity.

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Breedlove (T-H-L-K-D) is pretty wild.

Someone started a petition to save his article.

I'm confused why so many people care.

[iii]

I'm confused why so many people care.

You mean, other than being a replay of the culture wars?

[melloden]

I'm confused why so many people care.

You mean, other than being a replay of the culture wars?

But the person who started that petition is a middle-aged lady living in northern Michigan. What drives people like her to try to save a Wikipedia article, as opposed to what drives the middle-aged nerd living in northern nowhere to create useless Wikipedia articles?

[iii]

But the person who started that petition is a middle-aged lady living in northern Michigan. What drives people like her to try to save a Wikipedia article, as opposed to what drives the middle-aged nerd living in northern nowhere to create useless Wikipedia articles?

She didn't create the article; she just wants to preserve it. The supporters who commented on her petition seem to think that deleting the article would be akin to deleting the memory of the subject's existence, and, according to them, he deserves to be remembered because he appealed to miracles and a deity to explain his life and purpose (and restored their faith).

[SB_Johnny]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Breedlove (T-H-L-K-D) is pretty wild.

You actually read all that? Why?

[gomi]

[Mod note: despite being about a recently deceased person, I moved this to the BLP forum, because I see no reason why this young man's family and friends should come across this thread in any future google search.]

[melloden]

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Breedlove (T-H-L-K-D) is pretty wild.

You actually read all that? Why?

I read a few comments and realized no admin will be not lazy enough to actually close it without choosing no consensus.

She didn't create the article; she just wants to preserve it. The supporters who commented on her petition seem to think that deleting the article would be akin to deleting the memory of the subject's existence, and, according to them, he deserves to be remembered because he appealed to miracles and a deity to explain his life and purpose (and restored their faith).

Yes, but that's not what I'm wondering about. There are people driven to contribute to Wikipedia like this lady, who is interested in preserving some type of content. Then there are people like Malleus, who are trying create other types of content. What drives her type to only care about Wikipedia when it's "doing something wrong" by deleting this article, as opposed to people who actually start to care about the website?

[A Horse With No Name]

"Orange Mike" is being a real asshole in this debate. But, hey, he is what he is.

[Kelly Martin]

"Orange Mike" is being a real asshole in this debate.

That statement could be made with respect to any debate in which Orange Mike took a part. Honestly I cannot recall ever having seen him be anything other than a real asshole.

[Fusion]

what drives the middle-aged nerd living in northern nowhere to create useless Wikipedia articles?

Aren't they mainly under 25?

[iii]

There are people driven to contribute to Wikipedia like this lady, who is interested in preserving some type of content. Then there are people like Malleus, who are trying create other types of content. What drives her type to only care about Wikipedia when it's "doing something wrong" by deleting this article, as opposed to people who actually start to care about the website?

Righting the wrongs of the society is a hallmark of the culture wars. She doesn't care about "Wikipedia"; she cares that her perspective wins. She sees the very existence of the article as indicative of her perspective.