Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gaston Achille

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 redirect to Fencing at the 1900 Summer Olympics – Men's épée. ✗plicit 14:21, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gaston Achille[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:GNG, WP:SPORTCRIT #5, and as it sourced only to databases violates WP:NOTDATABASE.

All we know about him is his name, his date of birth and death, his nationality, and that he competed in the 1900 Olympics. BilledMammal (talk) 13:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Fencing at the 1900 Summer Olympics – Men's épée per WP:ATD, WP:PRESERVE, WP:R#KEEP and WP:CHEAP. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete we lack any significant sourcing that indicates notability. Such is lacking for a lot of competitors in the Olympics. The reality of what the first three Olympics actually were makes finding such sourcing very unlikely.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Lugnuts Adamtt9 (talk) 14:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and France. Shellwood (talk) 14:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Lugnuts. Alvaldi (talk) 08:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Olympics-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Although User:Lugnuts redirect is a good option, we really have nothing but database entries to preserve, and it's unlikely these are going away. It is doubtful that anything new will come up, but if it does there is really nothing lost in deleting this one. Jacona (talk) 13:57, 1 May 2022 (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.