Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Kolodziej

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. ✗plicit 14:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Kolodziej

[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)

Article fails notability requirements for inclusion (WP:N). It appears to be promotional advertisement and puffery. A WP:BEFORE Google search fails to turn up multiple independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage (WP:RS). The article references primary sources for some claims but most are unsourced so are not verifiable (WP:V). I would not be opposed to a redirect should a proper one be offered. ARose Wolf 14:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly everything can be sourced. Your opposition to anything or support for anything comes from where exactly? This is not an advertisement and not a puff piece. Multiple reliable sources for what exactly? Stick2700 (talk) 15:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I see no evidence at this time that this person is notable. I will happily change my mind if references are provided to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to this person. Cullen328 (talk) 15:54, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Cullen328. —Svārtava (t/u) • 16:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per Cullen328 above. Nothing here indicates WP:GNG is met. Tony Fox (arf!) 17:25, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete unless someone can PROVIDE sources (for a lot more than is here now), and not just assert that things can be sourced. Uporządnicki (talk) 18:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A person with a job. Does not rise anywhere close to the level of meeting GNG. --Kbabej (talk) 19:11, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Before the AfD started there was a lot of content about Kolodziej's accomplishments within the hockey universe, but none of it was verified by references. Hence the very short version under consideration at AfD. Between the AfD nomination and an Administrator's decision, referenced content can be added by Stick2700 (and other editors), with a stress on referenced. David notMD (talk) 19:36, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 19:52, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete no evidence this person meets the notability standards of Wikipedia, based on lack of available significant coverage about him. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Does not satisfy WP:GNG. Flibirigit (talk) 10:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And now, when everything is sourced, outside verifiable sources you change things back? Either delete the article, or verify the citations. You people are unbelievable. You allow the article to be started ten years ago by a cyberstalker and real life stalker, and now, when sources are provided you block edits? No wonder people say Wiki is a sewer. Stick2700 (talk) 12:26, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there are concerns about the article as it is or about improving the article not relevant to this deletion discussion then you are asked to take it to the article or user talk page. Thanks --ARose Wolf 12:40, 27 April 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.