Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Murawinski
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 no consensus, defaulting to keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 08:43, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Ed Murawinski
Was prodded for WP:BIO. I think the deletion of this article is not uncontroversial, but couldn't just deprod it and leave it to lie in its current unsourced state, for I figured I'd bring it here. My vote for now is Conditional Delete unless sources are located. - crz crztalk 04:38, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep Passes the google test; this guy seems like a reasonably well known sports cartoonist. I am not sure about sourcing issues here but I would be very reluctant to delete an article simply because it lacks sources unless such article could never be sourced satisfactorily or there is some reason to think the article is misleading. Allon Fambrizzi 08:33, 16 November 2006 (UTC)Allon Fambrizzi
- Comment Passing the google test in not an measure of notability. scope_creep 15:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Article lacks sources and fails to assert notability. scope_creep 15:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, AFD is not a means to solicit for sources. That is what the {{sources}} tag is for. hateless 01:35, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for telling me off. This AfD was in lieu of outright deletion. Your comment is uncalled for. - crz crztalk 04:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- I don't disagree with your nom if it were on procedural reasons, but that point seems to be obscured with your vote. If you want to make clear your nom is procedural, then make it clear. Otherwise, if sources is the problem, and sources seem to be obtainable, deletion is not the answer. hateless 04:50, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for telling me off. This AfD was in lieu of outright deletion. Your comment is uncalled for. - crz crztalk 04:09, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm not sure what Allon means, I'm not getting anything on him on Google at all. No indication that he even exists. I suppose I could be doing something wrong, but what? Anyway, in addition, the article is horrendously bad, removing the cruft would reduce it to an unverified stub. If someone wants to write a decent article on the guy, they might just a well start from scratch. Herostratus 04:03, 21 November 2006 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Kungfu Adam (talk) 13:37, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Delete as there is not much to redeem it in its current form. The writing style is poor and the article, being thin on facts, states the obvious, an example being - "He is the second of five children. He has an older sister and three younger siblings.". Go figure! LittleOldMe 17:55, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
- Keep I found a couple of sources and added the fact that he was nominated for a Reuben Award. The article could still use a bit of cleanup, including the deletion of some of the personal information.--FreeKresge 17:29, 24 November 2006 (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.
