Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Price (Tunnel Ball)

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 Delete --JForget 00:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] David Price (Tunnel Ball)

David Price (Tunnel Ball) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

An (almost) certain hoax. No sources supplied to assert any of the claims made. No evidence of the existence of tunnel ball as an international sport can be found on a quick web search, although I would be happy to be proved wrong. Mattinbgn\talk 01:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete I was tempted to speedy delete this, but there was a sufficent claim of notability. The article does appear to either be a hoax or about a non-notable person though. Nick Dowling (talk) 02:06, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Probably WP:COI, created by user:Bazzajim, article states David Price (Bazzajim) implying that it is himself writing, can not even find a article on Tunnel ball and can not find any WP:RS for tunnel ball (should say references as a notable sport does not exists, tunnel ball exists [1] but does not look like a sport with a world champion ship), so should have some kind of hit in google, but I can find none, would agree with speedy. Very likely hoax. --Stefan talk 02:27, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • G3 No proof that tunnel ball is a sport, no sources, no anything. Very likely hoax. So tagged. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:35, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Likely hoax, non-notable no matter what. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 03:36, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment, eyh, I played tunnel-ball when I was at primary school, but I find it somewhat dubious that it's played professionally. I think it's too plausible to be a G3 though. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:43, 7 June 2008 (UTC).
  • Delete, per above. Probable hoax, and if not, unreferenced bio of a living person. Lankiveil (speak to me) 02:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC).
  • Delete Sources first, notable content second, article creation third. Too many junk articles are created when these requirements are implemented in reverse order. Professor marginalia (talk) 02:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete as an unsourced article about an unnotable person. Probable hoax, too. Alexius08 is welcome to talk about his contributions. 04:21, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete No sources. Borock (talk) 06:01, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete An unreferenced article on a totally unnotable individual. Artene50 (talk) 07:33, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:N: there isn't any assertion of notability, and there is a complete lack of citations. Happyme22 (talk) 23:18, 7 June 2008 (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.