Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rudolf, Count of Rhaetia

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 Bernard (son of Charles the Fat). –Juliancolton | ^Talk 19:42, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Rudolf, Count of Rhaetia[edit]

Disputed prod. Original prod (by User:WikiDan61) read: Historical figure notable for one event. Sufficient coverage provided at Bernard (son of Charles the Fat) and I agree. It's just a stub that would never have a chance to be a fullfledged article, should just redirect to the mentioned article. DreamGuy (talk) 20:18, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Then why don't you redirect it? Nyttend (talk) 20:22, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Because the editor who removed the prod notice has a long history of aggressively reverting redirects and other actions and insists that a redirect is a delete so that a delete vote needs to be made. I disagree with him, but filing the AFD to prove to him that the article doesn't belong as is seems to be the only step he'll accept, otherwise edit wars and tagteaming/sockpuppets take over. It's easier just to AFD it. DreamGuy (talk) 21:04, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What User:DreamGuy writes about me above is false. I have reported DreamGuy at Wikipedia:Wikiquette alerts for for harassment, wikihounding and uncivil behavior. Wordssuch (talk) 05:48, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, good luck on that considering your edit history. DreamGuy (talk) 14:08, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I suspect that this article gives all the information that will ever be known about Rudolf: one line from the Annals of Fulda. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:56, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Bernard (son of Charles the Fat), which contains all the information on this person that a searcher can reasonably hope to find. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:07, 19 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per FisherQueen, given the lack of information. However, AfD and prod nominators should note that WP:ONEEVENT applies only to living people, not 9th-century noblemen. Rklear (talk) 06:49, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Actually, I have to disagree with that statement. While WP:ONEEVENT redirects to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, there is a subsection titled "People notable only for one event" on WP:BIO. This section contains a "see also" reference to the WP:BLP page, but it also applies the principle to ALL biographies. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect As the original "prodder", I agree that a redirect is a better solution. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 13:02, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - As per nom. Gaia Octavia Agrippa^Talk | _Sign 18:56, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and expand. There's always more, even in 9th century history. I added the very first item I found in Google Books, and there's a good deal more. People form a web, and anyone involved in one thing, will be involved in others. When they're ruling princes, they are not likely to be known for only one event. DGG (talk) 04:03, 22 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to a more suitable article. GT5162 ^{(我的对话页)} 18:00, 25 April 2009 (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.