Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eklund

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, with anons/newbies discounted. Xoloz 18:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eklund

Profile for an anonymous NHL-related blogger on hockeybuzz.com. Website is notable with an Alexa traffic rank of 38,539, but the "biography" is completely unverifiable speculation. Fails': Wikipedia:Verifiability --  Netsnipe  ^(Talk)  21:29, 10 August 2006 (UTC).

• Delete...completely non-notable. Akradecki 22:32, 10 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:NN and WP:V Ohconfucius 02:16, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• This should not be deleted, though referance to the fact that the information is speculation is important. In other articles, such as the 9/11 article, unsubstantiated conspiracy theories are posted. This individuals identity is important to the hockey community -mafew45 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.150.160.157 (talk • contribs) 03:40, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete - Non-notable, fails WP:BIO -- | Shishir Rane | talk | 05:34, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. With the controversy this person has generated, both in the Internet and "old media," I think the article is certainly notable. Clearly, verifiability is an issue, but the article should be kept and improved. --Jsorens 17:33, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. Teemu08 21:17, 11 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep! Eklund is an important figure (love him or hate him) in the hockey subculture. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.140.186.69 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 12 August 2006 (UTC).
• KeepAt the rate the site expands Hockey Buzz is likely to be one of the bigger hockey sites on the net in the next few seasons. The only unverifiable part is the true identity of Eklund, which isnt a significant part of the site. Ucscottb4u 16:59, 14 August 2006 (UTC)
• KEEP Note some of the names of the people contributing to this discussion page: ie: teemu08. This is an obvious hockey fan who has sided with Eklund and is protecting his identity. This article, or at LEAST an article about the controversy should exist, if his real identity can not be proven. ~mafew —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 139.57.140.50 (talk • contribs) .

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.