Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Sperl

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 delete. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:59, 20 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Sperl

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Clear case of WP:BIO1E and WP:NOTNEWS, no enduring coverage, all of the sourcing was in late 2016 - early 2017, after the Guinness announcement and all relating to the single event. Very similar case to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douglas and Mary Beth Meyer. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 14:14, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep due to breaking WP:Before/WP:DAN rules - I've been around here for 3 years. After never having interaction with this user, we have met 14 times around a month after I rejected the user's attempt to draftify an article. The user claims it is just total chance due to his New Page Patrol work, but with over 700 people in the New Page Patrol plus dozens to hundreds of articles being posted each day, the odds are astronomical. This will be Onel's 7th Afd Nomination attempt on me within about 2 weeks. The user publicly claimed "Too late, this same editor also has Christian Cavaletti, and Jackie Miley, and Harry Sperl, which I'm also probably going to nominate." before making this attempt in this thread - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Douglas_and_Mary_Beth_Meyer. This breaks wikipedia WP:BEFORE rules under Wikipedia:DAN, which completely nullifies the attempt. It also breaks WP:DLC, WP:REVENGE, WP:GAME, WP:MEAT, WP:WITCHHUNT and others. Beyond that, the article meets WP:GNG and has in-depth coverage. I'm really sorry that everyone has to have their time wasted over personal issues. I'm sure we will all see each other again real soon when he fulfills his threat on Jackie Miley (And if it's that much of a slam dunk case, why wait?), but either way, I'm not going to be stopped from contributing to the websiteKatoKungLee (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
A good-faith explanation would be that Onel5969 sees your articles as low-quality and is just going through them to see if they are NN. Also, WP:DAN is an essay and not a guideline/policy. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:41, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Sungodtemple - I do not see how publicly announcing multiple nomination intentions in an unrelated thread with a user you do not get along with is possibly WP:GOODFAITH. If you want to have a nomination discussion, why would that not do that at a wikiproject talk page or at an AFD nomination? I would also expect a user with the privileges and experiences he has to know that. KatoKungLee (talk) 15:01, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Food and drink, Awards, History, Germany, and Florida. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{(work / talk)} 14:30, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: After seeing the other discussion on grapefruit, I see the same issue presented here, no WP:SUSTAINED coverage. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:46, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Unfortunately, unlike the other AfD mentioned by the nominator, there is nothing here that can be merged to hamburger. Delete as clear WP:BLP1E fail with purely WP:ROUTINE coverage. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{(work / talk)} 14:58, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Museums and libraries-related deletion discussions. - "Ghost of Dan Gurney" ^{(work / talk)} 14:59, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete another WP:BLP1E for a Guinness World record holder, and again, they don't meet WP:GNG. And do not merge/redirect to hamburger as doing so would not benefit that article in any way. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete a single editor has created a run of articles about Guinness record holders. In most cases such records do not confer notability. The solution is to stop creating them, not make accusations about other editors’ conduct. Mccapra (talk) 20:57, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as an aside, it’s remarkable that when new page patrollers try to redirect, merge or draftify new articles there’s usually a great chorus of “take it to AfD”, and when you do, you are met with indignation. Mccapra (talk) 21:00, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:22, 13 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clear case of WP:BLP1E. Best, GPL93 (talk) 17:40, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is another Guinness record holder, who lacks WP:SUSTAINED coverage and any notability. In addition, I agree that this article is a case of WP:BIO1E and WP:NOTNEWS and merits deletion. This article brings to mind the cliche: "Where's the beef." Paul H. (talk) 03:13, 16 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - clear WP:BLP1E violation. Sergecross73 msg me 15:11, 16 March 2023 (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.