Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ronnie Rico

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. Cirt (talk) 01:28, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ronnie Rico[edit]

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

Article appears to be a WP:HOAX - the search term ("ronnie rico" snowboard -facebook -myspace) yields 5 gHits[1], which seems extremely low given the stated release of the CD was 1997. However, given the number of gHits on just Ronnie Rico, it is possible that it existed. If that is the case, it surely lacks WP:RS. Checking other sources such as archive.org was also a bust. Should this article be deleted, though, I would argue that it be done without prejudice. There is another Ronnie Rico [2] who may at some point meet WP:GNG. In the interest of full disclosure, I put the {{unreferenced}} tag in the article from a public computer. Vulture19 (talk) 03:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Possible WP:HOAX; fails WP:V in any case. The "music" section of the article is clearly WP:OR, assuming this exists at all. I wasn't able to find reliable sources to establish notability or existence of this fictional musician, and if there were sources this would probably be a candidate for merging to The Movement Snowboards anyway. A Stop at Willoughby (talk) 04:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Possible hoax. Also possibly about a hoax which would have potential but then there are still problems with notability and verifiability. I agree with Willoughby that this little topic can be described in the article for The Movement Snowboards. Doomsdayer520 (Talk|Contribs) 11:28, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Even if this could be proven true, which I doubt, this fictional character is not remotely notable individually. --Glenfarclas (talk) 12:30, 16 December 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.