Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rob Frampton

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. j⚛e decker ^talk 23:50, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Rob Frampton

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

~~Per this request on my userpage; article subject requests deletion.~~ Sources are limited, notability borderline; ~~in such cases, deletion after a community discussion is fairly standard.~~ See note below for strikethrough reasoning. Yunshui ^雲 _水 12:58, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There simply isn't enough significant coverage from reliable and independent sources to meet our notability guidelines, WP:42. Most of his google hits that I'm seeing are either unreliable, primary sources or forum postings. And besides that, it's not all that uncommon to grant deletion for individuals who request deletion of their own article, especially when they are lacking in the notability department as is the case here in my opinion (example1 and example2). — dain omite 13:42, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note I'm having second thoughts about this. If I'm re-reading User:Robframton's contribution history and messages correctly, that account was not set up by Rob Frampton himself (many of its earliest edits are allegations that the article subject would be very unlikely to make...). One assumes from the message that inspired this AFD that Mr Frampton has control of the account, but if he doesn't, posing as him and making a deletion request would be a good way of getting a page about someone you disliked deleted. I'd therefore recommend that !voters disregard the apparent wishes of the subject and make their recommendations based purely on the notability or otherwise of the topic, at least until it can be determined that Rob Frampton is in fact the operator of the account User:Robframpton. Yunshui ^雲_水 14:20, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Ah, yeah, I see now. When I saw the following line on Solarra's talk page ("My wife signed in and wrote this i have found it on her computer and to save this happening again i would just like the information removed please!") I thought "he" meant that his wife had made the initial edit on Solarra's talk page and this was "Rob" who made the second edit and has summarily asked for deletion afterwards. I'm not even going to put down what I think now because it's just pure speculation and there's no way of knowing at this moment. However, I still think a delete is in order nonetheless. — dain omite 15:35, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:36, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Yunshui and dainomite. This request was originally posted on my talk page, and I don't feel this passes WP:ATHLETE. ♥ Solarra ♥ ^{♪ 話 ♪} ߷ _{♀ 投稿 ♀} 01:37, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per User:Yunshui and User:dainomite. Agreed doesn't meet WP:ATHLETE Dudel250 Chat PROD Log CSD Logs 07:07, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do not Delete I do not thinh that WP:BLPNOTE fails.

AHLM13

✉ 11:54, 10 June 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.