Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/E. Marmsoler

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 keep. JForget 00:09, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Article was also previously moved to E. Marmsoler --JForget 00:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Marmsoler[edit]

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

Cannot find any online sources (the one source in the article is a dead link). All ghits are mirrors. Missing first name, and only "possibly living". The subject seems notable, but lacking evidence that he actually exists, we can't be sure. (Edit: google query was marmsoler luge -wiki.) — This, that, and the other (talk) 07:03, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Should be in the "Living people" category because there's no way he's over 90, but tossing the link into the Wayback Machine confirms that the link verified his existence as does another results page for the tournament. Whether WP:ATHLETE covers every participant at European Championships I'm not certain, but I'd argue that it covers the medal winners at the minimum. A better course of action here would have been to leave a note on the user's talk page asking him to provide confirmation, rather than nomming for deletion. Cheers, CP 15:12, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I am only going on the information I had at the time. The FIL does not have the information on their site so I had to look to alternative sources as a result. Even though they did not compete at the World Level, they were successful at the European level. Chris (talk) 18:01, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:09, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - Assertion of notability is enough to warrant a keep despite a lack of verification, since it appears that there could be sources out there. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 03:22, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep — Per above reasons, weak. ContinueWithCaution (talk) 03:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete with no prejudice against recreation for complete lack of sources. I don't doubt existence, but notability claims notwithstanding there is no reason to have a 'biography' that merely is an inference from some results tables.--Tikiwont (talk) 18:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:52, 29 November 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.