Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wolfe+585, Senior

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 merge. I have added the merge suggestion tags. W.marsh 20:48, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wolfe+585, Senior

Wolfe+585, Senior (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Seems to ba a hoax to me. I found a source stating that the Guiness Book 1978 indeed had an entry for this person, but nothing else. There was a previous discussion for this article under an other name, the result was Delete. -- lucasbfr ^talk 18:28, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

• Merge into List of unusual personal names Z388 18:49, 5 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete and do not merge unless verified. Kusma (討論) 21:46, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

Incomplete nomination, listed now. Kusma (討論) 10:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletions. -- Kusma (討論) 10:19, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge into List of unusual personal names if verified. IA (talk) 10:28, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• It's not unverifiable. 20 seconds with Google Books turns up the exact page number in the 1981 edition of GBWR that this can be found on. Uncle G 12:21, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • I believe that he had an entry in the Guinness books for a couple of years. I do not believe that this entry is truw, as so many things about it are suspsicious: a German person with many non-German first names, a Lastnamemostofwhichmakessomekindofsenseingermanbuttwichisingramerspelingstuffnotgermanthengoescompletelyofftopicaddingsomeunrelatedwordsnamesfreedomattackthroughenemieswhichtwelfthousandyearsbeforefirstmanthatspaceshipused ... it goes on for a bit more. The "first man with spaceship" bit is really, really odd, and that this was dropped from the Guinness book serves to me as a verification that it is not true. Kusma (討論) 12:29, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    • The correct merge target if we do merge is in my opinion Fictitious entry, although we'd need to verify whether it is true or not for that as well. All we know for sure is that he was listed in the GBWR and is no longer listed there. Kusma (討論) 12:33, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
    • You are presenting a choice of trusting either the Guinness Book of World Records, with a known reputation and authorship, which could have dropped this entry for several reasons, or trusting the personal opinion, that this name is suspect, of a pseudonymous Wikipedia editor, based upon xyr own analysis and unsupported by any sources at all. And even the logic of that personal opinion is shaky. There's no requirement that a name that someone contrives in order to achieve a world record make grammatical sense in German, or that German people have solely German given names. Wikipedia:Verifiability and Wikipedia:No original research says that we should side with the GBWR until other sources are written, fact checked, and published. Uncle G 15:12, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
      • I suggest we trust teh Guinness Book of World Records, whose newer editions do not list this person anymore. Kusma (討論) 16:04, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
        • The guiness book of records drops records and introduces new ones each year (or else why would people have an incentive to buy new copies?). With a few exceptions, records such as this will repeat for a few years and then leave for a new one. Given that they've never retracted the statement, I don't see why that shouldn't be considered a reliable source.
        • Only if the Guinness Book removed Mr. Wolfe+585 for someone with a shorter or equal-length name would that removal concern me as to his verifiability. If they dropped him in favor of someone with a longer name, that would just mean his record was broken. And if they dropped the category entirely, that could just mean that they thought the category was no longer useful because someone could adopt a contrived name merely for the purpose of trying to get listed in the book, as opposed for wanting to use the name in his actual life -- which may, in fact, have been the case for Mr. Wolfe+585. --Metropolitan90 22:16, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to List of unusual personal names. I do remember him having an entry in the Guinness Book of World Records. Per Uncle G, my skepticism that this was actually his name does not make him unverifiable. --Metropolitan90 15:34, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
  • We should perhaps edit the article down to verifiable facts: what appeared in which editions of the GBWR. Strangely enough, these few editions of the GBWR seem to be the only existing source, like for a classic Nihilartikel. But probably we'll have to live with an article that is not true just because it appears to be verifiable. Kusma (討論) 16:10, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: Descending into either the completely unverified or the potentially verifiable, depending on how good your library is and how good this random internet posting is: The top entry at this discussion (the website link does not work and leads to strange places) claims that indeed some guy in Philadelphia made up a name similar to this. It appears to have not been his birth name. Kusma (討論) 16:22, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• Keep this appears to be notable, even if we have to change the wording to suggest that there is some doubt over the validity of the term. Robdurbar 19:31, 6 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge to List of unusual personal names. Even if it is verifiable, that doesn't mean that it deserves its own article. Xeinart 02:16, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Merge as descibed above. Not notable enough for its own article. This guy has done NOTHING else notable than have a unique name. The name itself is notable, but only in the context of the above list. --Jayron32 05:36, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Believe it or not, I want to see a merge as well. It's hard for me to write this, since this was my very first contribution to Wikipedia. But if there is a site more relevant than that for purposes of Wolfe+585, Senior, then go ahead. I will make two observations, though:
  • The first 35 letters of the name (Wolfeschlegelsteinhausenbergerdorff) do appear to be authentic.
  • Someone out there was reading my sandbox entries! Lucasbfr, I hope you long for Buddy Wayne, BooTeasha, the Boogerbergers and the rest as much as I do.–Desmond Hobson 16:22, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Not notable. Just because Guinness was lame enough to include this in their book doesn't mean this should be in an encyclopedia. Anyone can change their name to have a thousand letters (or a million letters). --- RockMFR 04:33, 13 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.