Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stranger (person)

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. The author is welcome to contribute to Stranger danger. JohnCD (talk) 22:42, 2 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stranger (person)[edit]

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

Article is the work of a single editor nad presents a personal viewpoint and original research. It has twice been prodded for deletion; the second time the prod was removed on the basis that "i made some improvements", though this is in fact hardly realistic and does not address the origianl prodder's onjection. The article is at best a dicdef (and not a very good one). Emeraude (talk) 13:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Stranger, a disambiguation page that Stranger also redirects to. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:09, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Stranger danger. Problems with original research, verifiability and lack of a neutral point of view. Edison (talk) 15:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - violates WP:NOT a dictionary and IMO, is written in an extremely non-neutral POV. --BaronVonYiffington (talk) 16:52, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and don't redirect, original research essay and I don't like redirects with qualifiers. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 17:26, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - a rather bizarre article, too big for a dictionary definition and way too small to act as a notable substitute for the existing Stranger danger, which is is already all that WP needs. DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 19:41, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Firstly i'd like to give an award to whomever wrote such a lengthy article to define a word bravo for work ethic. However I agree this is a clear case of WP:NOT and borders on WP:OR (how else can someone take a definition and turn it into a page long article). Nefariousski (talk) 21:38, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Excuse me, if you people don't mind another opinion, I'm the person who created this wonderful article (heh heh, sarcasm)...I know that this article may not be suitable for wikipedia, and may act as a dictionary article. But I was thinking of a solution to benefit us all, by possibly merging this article to the existing Stranger danger article. This does not mean to include this whole article into the merge, but a good piece of it. Thoughts/Questions? Tinton5 (talk) 04:24, 24 February 2010 (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.