Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tristan Peterson

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 of the debate was delete. – Robert 01:32, 8 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Tristan Peterson

Was put up as speedy, but claims to be respected Melbourne inhabitant who has won several tournaments in swordsmanship, so I'm not happy having it as a speedy. Said user mentioned it no hits Google), so I'd be happy to delete based on unverifiability, but I would like some outside opinion first. - Mgm|^(talk) 12:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

Comment Said user is here. I agree in that I'm (again) being a bit too eager in speedying doubtful new pages. –Mysid 12:54, 2 December 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Seems to exist all right [1] but to lack notability. Dlyons493 14:05, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Notability, verifiabilty. Also, likely a hoax, since it was added to Cult figure. Wikibofh 14:13, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Keep - not much said about it, but its verified here: [2]. Quiz question. Not a hoax. Enough for me. Would you have a quiz question about someone who was not heard of? I don't think so. My name has never been in a quiz question (other than by family members etc) and I bet most people's names are never used either. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 15:52, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: Anyone can make a quiz there. I could make one about, oh, Invisible Pink Unicorns, but it doesn't mean it's verifiable.  :) Wikibofh 15:55, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: That quiz was written by someone who is possibly from the same school he attended (Kensington Community High School) and may even be him given their email address is his name at KCHS.vic.edu.au. Sarah Ewart 01:54, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete 81 Google hits for "Tristan Peterson" and nothing on the first page about this man. [3]. The one verifiable reference found so far is for a quiz on Melbourne's newest rock band so that doesn't assist us much. A search of Australian and New Zealand newspapers came up with nothing about him either. Scarcely verifiable and falls well short of WP:BIO. The only form of modern-day notability for a swordsman would be appearing in the Olympics in a fencing event which he appears not to have done. Capitalistroadster 16:19, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. . Capitalistroadster 16:52, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete the non-notable. — FREAK OF NUR_xTURE (TALK) 17:15, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, speed delete! pure vanity, 99.9% for sure written by the person himself (not that is always a bad thing) and is nothing but self promotion of an apparently un-notable personality. Come on, read the text! Dead give away. What is the deal with the IQ of 172, ...yeah right! (laughing in the background). Well its like a key marker. There must be no more than 600-1000 people in the world with an IQ of 170 or above, and this is one of them? Speed delete! IQ 140-150 and one could have gotten away with it, but 172, no way and you better wrap it in xmas paper or something. I see no xmas paper, in fact I see nothing of notablity at all! Twthmoses 20:39, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Non-notable. I'm from Melbourne and I can report that he is not one of the most respected men in this city, otherwise the general public (incl. myself) would have heard of his. Cnwb 21:59, 2 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable. Jtmichcock 00:33, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Ambi 02:20, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. --Roisterer 05:00, 3 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as nn. Sarah Ewart 01:54, 4 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as per the nominator. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 10:19, 4 December 2005 (UTC)

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.