Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexis Flores

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Sr13 03:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Alexis Flores

Alexis Flores (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I can't really see how being added to anybody's top ten is particularly notable. Navou 15:51, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

  • Template:Correct Weak Keep If references were added it would be suitable, its not just anyones top 10, its the FBI's. Regards --The Sunshine Man 15:58, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep If all the other current FBI Top Tenners (Glen Stewart Godwin) get a page, then this guy should. It just needs a little cleanup. --PAK Man + 16:00, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Regardless of who else got an article, and not sure how that argument is helpful here, I'm not really seeing this one satisfy WP:BIO. Navou 16:18, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Because he's covered by multiple independent sources. Nick mallory 16:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per multiple independent sources. SakotGrimshine 16:35, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep and Cleanup — Looks fine to me. It has sources, but just needs to be cleaned up. *Cremepuff222* "As cool as grapes..." 17:25, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Delete- Per nominator Navou. Hundreds of people have been on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list and last time I checked not all of them have their own articles. Thus Being placed on the list alone is not notable enough to warrant an article. We really shouldn't waste valuable server space creating unessesary articles. WP:N states that articles on people only notable for one event (i.e in this case being placed on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted list) should be redirects to that particular event. Sincerely, --William Howard Hart 18:53, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment Hundreds of articles would fit on a floppy disk, probably a hundredth of cent of disk space. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment Wikipedia is not paper. Having articles isn't a waste of 'valuable server space'. Arguments should be based on policy, not on personal dislike of or distaste for article subjects. --Charlene 19:08, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
I did not see any reference to the editors like or dislike of the articles subject. How do you address the latter part of the argument referencing WP:N? Navou 19:31, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Its well sourced and enough information. If there is not enough information for people that have been on in the past, they can have a line or two at the main article space. Top 10 is always notable, buy there isn't always enough meat for an entire article. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 21:28, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep FBI Ten Most Wanted Fugitives are notable. --Kitch (Talk : Contrib) 22:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep I think that each fugitive on the Ten Most Wanted list is sufficiently notable to warrant their own page. The fact that not every one has had a page created is not justification for deleting those that do. 3 June 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by RyanGentry (talk • contribs).
  • keep it is notable enough to be on top of the fbi list so it is notable for us too yuckfoo 01:56, 4 June 2007 (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.