Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnson Parks (2nd nomination): Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
*'''Delete''' As being insubstantially different from the version that was [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnson Parks|deleted previously]] over a decade ago. There are currently three sources, two of which are trivial mentions, and the third of which is an obituary - none of these sources establish the type of coverage that would satisfy [[WP:N]]'s requirement of multiple, non-trivial coverage in independent, third-party, [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. There's no Wikipedia policy or consensus that states that the oldest anything is automatically notable by the encyclopedia's standards; [[Wikipedia:WikiProject World's Oldest People/Article alerts/Archive|numerous AfDs on the "oldest" individuals]] have been kept or deleted based on their individual merits. Thus we default to the general notability guidelines and any material of encyclopedic merit was already included on the many longevity-related lists on Wikipedia when this was first deleted 10+ years ago. [[User:Canadian Paul|<span style="color:red">Canadian</span>]] [[User talk:Canadian Paul|<span style="color:orange">Paul</span>]] 14:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' As being insubstantially different from the version that was [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Johnson Parks|deleted previously]] over a decade ago. There are currently three sources, two of which are trivial mentions, and the third of which is an obituary - none of these sources establish the type of coverage that would satisfy [[WP:N]]'s requirement of multiple, non-trivial coverage in independent, third-party, [[WP:RS|reliable sources]]. There's no Wikipedia policy or consensus that states that the oldest anything is automatically notable by the encyclopedia's standards; [[Wikipedia:WikiProject World's Oldest People/Article alerts/Archive|numerous AfDs on the "oldest" individuals]] have been kept or deleted based on their individual merits. Thus we default to the general notability guidelines and any material of encyclopedic merit was already included on the many longevity-related lists on Wikipedia when this was first deleted 10+ years ago. [[User:Canadian Paul|<span style="color:red">Canadian</span>]] [[User talk:Canadian Paul|<span style="color:orange">Paul</span>]] 14:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC) |
||
*'''Delete''' Clearly fails SIGCOV and GNG. Disputed Speedy delete is borderline disruption. [[User:DerbyCountyinNZ|<span style="background:orange; color:blue">DerbyCountyinNZ</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> 20:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC) |
*'''Delete''' Clearly fails SIGCOV and GNG. Disputed Speedy delete is borderline disruption. [[User:DerbyCountyinNZ|<span style="background:orange; color:blue">DerbyCountyinNZ</span>]] <sup>([[User talk:DerbyCountyinNZ|Talk]] [[Special:Contribs/DerbyCountyinNZ|Contribs]])</sup> 20:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC) |
||
*'''Merge''' to [[List of supercentenarians from the United States]]. [[User:Longevitydude|Longevitydude]] ([[User talk:Longevitydude|talk]]) 23:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 23:38, 23 February 2018
Nonnotable man. RightGot (talk) 00:10, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
- delete - As a non-notable supercentenarian. Two GRG tables and a one sentence mention in someone else's obituary does not make someone notable. Also given that these sources strain to pad the article with longevity trivia (oldest for 85 days, third oldest black man, etc) means that even if he was somehow notable, then WP:NOPAGE would almost certainly apply. CommanderLinx (talk) 07:01, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete As being insubstantially different from the version that was deleted previously over a decade ago. There are currently three sources, two of which are trivial mentions, and the third of which is an obituary - none of these sources establish the type of coverage that would satisfy WP:N's requirement of multiple, non-trivial coverage in independent, third-party, reliable sources. There's no Wikipedia policy or consensus that states that the oldest anything is automatically notable by the encyclopedia's standards; numerous AfDs on the "oldest" individuals have been kept or deleted based on their individual merits. Thus we default to the general notability guidelines and any material of encyclopedic merit was already included on the many longevity-related lists on Wikipedia when this was first deleted 10+ years ago. Canadian Paul 14:09, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
- Delete Clearly fails SIGCOV and GNG. Disputed Speedy delete is borderline disruption. DerbyCountyinNZ (Talk Contribs) 20:33, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
- Merge to List of supercentenarians from the United States. Longevitydude (talk) 23:38, 23 February 2018 (UTC)