Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Maurice Archieri

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Keep, withdrawn by nominator Pilatus 22:52, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Maurice Achieri

Delete - This guy claimed to be pope. So what? No claims of a significant number (or any) followers. Anybody can claim to be pope, king, god, or whatever. By itself that means nothing. Also, happening to have the same name as another person (even if that person is notable) isn't signficant either. rob 02:09, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

• Widthdrawn and suggest delist - Based on what Pharos found, I'll agree to dropping this, and removing it. I'm not sure if I'm allowed to do that myself, so maybe an admin can drop this, since nobody has voted delete (and re-directs, if wanted don't require an AFD). At this stage, I don't know if this person is notable, or not, but I now see he exists, and has one or two followers, at least. This is why people need to cite sources in articles. --rob 05:25, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect to Antipope or Antipope#Sedevacantist antipopes--Apyule 03:10, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep he's listed in Antipope which is a notable phenomenon. --best, kevin ···Kzollman | Talk··· 03:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Notable antipope. I would like to know more about him, but from the mention of his name in a number of places, one can presume he does have some significant following.--Pharos 03:35, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
  • In searches I've done, he seems to be mentioned almost exclusively in wikipedia itself, or mirrors of wikipedia. Is there some other signficant other mentions of this person? Is there any evidence, anybody other than him, considers him a "pope". --rob 04:20, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
    • Mystery solved. The reason "Maurice Achieri" is only mentioned on Wikipedia and mirrors is because we spelled the name wrong (how embarrasing). His name is actually "Maurice Archieri" with an r. Here's his website.--Pharos 05:07, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect as per Apyule. The problem with this article is that it contains literally no information about Achieri beyond what is already stated in the Antipope article (the longer of the two sentences in this article is about a different antipope with the same regnal name). The article can be recreated if someone actually has some information to write about him. --Metropolitan90 03:53, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Redirect per Apyule if the article can't be expanded.  :-) >: Roby Wayne ^{Talk • Hist} 04:03, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• keep this please but a redirect should be okay if that is what we are doing Yuckfoo 04:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, after move as per Pharos's comment. - Andre Engels 11:37, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep at new correct page Maurice Archieri, not a redirect to Antipope; the problem with a redirect to Antipope is that people are less likely to create/expand on an article if its already a redirect to something else, they might think that it's not important enough to recreate the article.--Kewp 14:16, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, as moved. -- BD2412 ^talk 17:46, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Antipopes who have any following or press coverage are notable.--Nicodemus75 17:49, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Speedy keep and move to Maurice Archieri. Hall Monitor 19:21, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: As mentioned, I withrew the nomination, I took te AFD off the page as well. --rob 19:31, 29 September 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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.