Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Connor Osburn
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was DELETE. Postdlf 09:11, 9 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Not note worthy / Vanity. The only Connor Osburn I found on the internet was a Spelling Bee winner. I would imagine that a Nobel Prize winner would have had much said about him on the internet. Delete --Colin Angus Mackay 23:17, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Umm... Sorry guys - I seem to have messed up adding this entry and I can't figure out how to fix it. Can someone assist? --Colin Angus Mackay 23:31, 3 May 2005 (UTC)It seems to be fixed now. Thanks. --Colin Angus Mackay 09:52, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The name is also not listed on List of Nobel laureates. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:27, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
Therefore, this could be Speedied since it is a hoax/joke article.Zzyzx11 (Talk) 23:30, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]- I don't think hoax is a speedy criteria. --Dmcdevit 23:48, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- How about this? Under General section of WP:CSD: 4. Pure vandalism. And under Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism: Sneaky vandalism: Adding misinformation ... which is reverted because the source material is easily available. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:03, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps you're right, but it's just that "hoax" is a common enough thing that I would have thought it would be explicitly mentioned. Especially because it gives admins a lot of leeway to delete unwanted articles without vfd if they can cite "hoax". Is there precedent for speedying hoaxes? I just don't know, so I certainly could be wrong :) --Dmcdevit 02:00, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- How about this? Under General section of WP:CSD: 4. Pure vandalism. And under Wikipedia:Vandalism#Types of vandalism: Sneaky vandalism: Adding misinformation ... which is reverted because the source material is easily available. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:03, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- However, I would be reluctant to speedy it right away if someone feels like rewriting it to describe another notable Connor Osburn. Zzyzx11 (Talk) 01:21, 4 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think hoax is a speedy criteria. --Dmcdevit 23:48, 3 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.