Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hartley Jackson

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 no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination. It's pretty clear that there's WP:SPA activity here and quorum would be thin after eliminating the suspects. Deleting the AfD via G5 would have been appropriate before the discussion started, but once it's started, it becomes less so. slakr^\ talk / 10:52, 4 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hartley Jackson[edit]

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

This was rejected at WP:AFC here and yet the user uploaded it anyway. Not notable and has done nothing to warrant this article. 203.12.30.74 (talk) 04:42, 23 April 2014 (UTC) -- completed at IP request at WT:AFD by GB fan 14:51, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. For one, it is not nominated by a registered user, and I don't see who has any responsibility here, as GB fan disavows it. Two, the link to the AFC draft shows it was then rejected for not having any sources. It does have sources now. It seems the nomination is misleading. Why should we take this seriously? --do ncr am 23:39, 23 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The responsibility for the AFD goes to 203.12.30.74 who nominated it but did not have the technical ability to create this page. GB fan 00:01, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete I know votes don't count by themselves, but Doncram's comment should be noted as not relevant and the rules exist for IP's to nominate for AfD's. On the article, notability is severely deficient per WP:ATHLETE and WP:ENTERTAINER. BerleT (talk) 03:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Withdrawn per my comments on the Kellie Skater AfD. BerleT (talk) 07:20, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Plenty of unsourced statements that have been tagged accordingly. The sources given (with the exception of Cage Match, Wrestling Titles and Pro Fight DB) are at best highly questionable as reliable. Many are self promotional (Merge and Johnson in particular). Dragonfire X (talk) 11:46, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Wrestling-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:48, 24 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

HOLD EVERYTHING This AfD was initiated by banned User:Justa Punk. The IP has admitted to being this banned user here. Let's close this immediately, as any result will inevitably be overturned on procedural grounds. GaryColemanFan (talk) 00:02, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is indeed the case. However, this still appears to be a reasonable AfD, and the outcome of closing this would inevitably be to immediately open another one, so I suggest we let it run. The closing administrator can judge any issues that occur. Black Kite (talk) 00:11, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The two delete votes are suspicious, at the very least. For an account (Dragonfire X) to return to activity after 4 years away from Wikipedia and immediately gravitate to this trio of Australian wrestling deletion discussions (User:Justa Punk's m.o.) sounds like a WP:DUCK to me. I also notice that BerleT spends a disproportionately large time on Australian wrestling deletion discussions.

To the closing admin, please note my comments on the Rionne McAvoy AfD as they also apply here. 1.124.170.156 (talk) 21:31, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Lacks the coverage from reliable sources needed to meet WP:GNG. 204.126.132.231 (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: call for closure with Keep I voted "Keep" above. This is one of three AFD noms (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rionne McAvoy, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kellie Skater (2nd nomination), and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hartley Jackson} by a banned editor "helped" by editor User:GB fan who refused to take responsibility for the nomination, and it is a waste of regular editors' time. Deleting it per the banned editor's wishes would reward the banned editor, i.e. it would feed the troll. I call for immediate closure, which I believe is regular practice in this situation (though I am not really familiar with it), as per User:GaryColemanFan at Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion#Rionne McAvoy, Kellie Skater and Hartley Jackson AfD's, "This can only turn out one of two ways: (1) Kept, or (2) Overturned on procedural grounds. Can we just close them now and save the hassle, please?". I endorse that. --do ncr am 01:28, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - could not find enough reliable source coverage from PWTorch etc. as "Hartley Jackson" or "JAG". starship.paint "YES !" 06:11, 26 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable 203.17.215.22 (talk) 03:33, 30 April 2014 (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.