Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roger Ver

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep. (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 00:53, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Roger Ver

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable individual, fails even WP:ONEEVENT. Minor criminal and tax protestor/self-exile, nothing of note except criminal activities. Tenaqzn'f Fbvyrq Gubat (talk) 09:31, 6 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:15, 7 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article had been heavily vandalized back in March.[1] I've restored the deleted sources and content. Thanks for bringing this matter to my attention! (Oh and the name of the vandal was, drum roll, User:Rogerver) -- Kendrick7^talk 00:09, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Well, based on Google News Search, we seem to have clear notability. Or at least notoriety. A few recent mainstream news articles about Mr. Ver and his activities: [2][3][4][5] John Nagle (talk) 06:41, 8 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - clear notability when doing a simple google news search.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:28, 12 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.