Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chris Lamprecht

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. §FreeRangeFrog^croak 03:27, 8 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Chris Lamprecht

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

Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and fails to state a reason the subject should be considered notable in lieu of sources per WP:ANYBIO. Sources offered are links to what appear to be the subject's own posts to various blog pages and a link to his home page, all obviously WP:PRIMARY, a link to the subject's prison record and two trivial mentions, one on the Kaspersky timeline page and another in the Wired article about whether to give prisoners access to computers. Googling turned up two books that might be sources Hacker Culture and Hackers: Crime and the Digital Sublime but these sources seem to be less about the subject and more about the crime. Based on the evidence, I believe this is a case of an individual known only for a single criminal event and, per WP:1E, should probably not the subject of an article. Msnicki (talk) 17:22, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:39, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:39, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Computing-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - notable per being the first to get this verdict.--BabbaQ (talk) 21:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: notable for being banned from internets by District Judge in TX, authoring phrack articles [1] (and being "prophiled" in it [2]), ToneLoc,[3][4][5][6] - which he presented a talk for at the SummerCon '93 conference, appearing in BBS: The Documentary by Jason Scott [7], Indeed.com. I found an entire 5 page spread on him[8] in Swing Magazine(a print publication of the 90s[9]) and coverage in Wired[10] Some stuff on LexisNexis[11]. Martin has stuff over at Attrition[12]. ZDNet (Kevin Poulsen) wrote a piece on him. [13] -- dsprc ^[talk] 04:17, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NORTH AMERICA¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:34, 1 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Dsprc's analysis and sources demonstrate notability. Cavarrone 07:47, 2 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Actually, the archived copy of paranoia.com/~mthreat [14] contains a wealth of sources from the time, including publications such as the Annenberg Journalism Review [15] and various television appearances. I'm sure WP:WIKILIB could dig up more with their privileged access to publications as well. The article needs work but the subject is definitely notable. -- dsprc ^[talk] 19:01, 2 February 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.