Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Reeves (Professional balloon jumper)

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 Snowy, snowy deletion Grutness...wha? 03:12, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

David Reeves (Professional balloon jumper)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Delete. Clearly a hoax, all references are fictitious. Speedy declined by admin. WWGB (talk) 02:19, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. —WWGB (talk) 02:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. —WWGB (talk) 02:24, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above. I would have supported speedy but...oh well. Adabow (talk · contribs) 02:32, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Obvious nonsense. No Google results on full name as per main article and using a variant spelling only get results from a genealogy site. Person on genealogy site has same date of birth so this is most likely a practical joke. Daveosaurus (talk) 02:37, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete as an obvious hoax. I've asked the admin who declined the original speedy request to reconsider.-gadfium 02:50, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but slowly, because a single reference doesn't appear to be enough for notability. Whether or not this is real, I see no good reason to say that this is so blatant that it can be speedy deleted: nothing here is unrealistic or easily provable to be wrong. Nyttend (talk) 02:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree -- I'm concerned at a tendency to jump to speedy deletion when references are simply hard to come by. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 11:40, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quite. "Professional baloon jumper", "ping pong champion", "circulating tapestry magazines", "millions of readers from the New York times to the BBC", "mathematical and reverse engineering genius" ... Let's not jump to any hasty decision that the author may be having a lend of us! What a waste of everyone's time. WWGB (talk) 11:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Being careful and getting the right answer is not a waste of time. Some perfectly valid articles have been proposed for speedy deletion because they were implausible or the references were not avilable online. And there are hoaxes too of course. As you say, let's not jump to conclusions. Kenilworth Terrace (talk) 11:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete clearly rubbish. DerbyCountyinNZ ^{(Talk Contribs)} 03:01, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Professional balloon jumper?!?! Carrite (talk) 03:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Delete - Put down the DB, bro. Carrite (talk) 03:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems like a hoax VASterling (talk) 13:43, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.