Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Treger

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, without prejudice against resubmission. Due to the prior vandalism this is a rather odd submission. We have deletes, but their reasoning is predicated on the "at-submission" status of the article. I considered both a relist and a no-consensus result, but I felt that that would actually be falsely weighing the policy in play. It would also be hindering actual consideration. There were also dedicated Keep !votes on the current (and original) nature of the content and a request for a new AfD.

As such, I'm going to close this as a keep, but if an individual wants to renominate they are free to do so immediately. Anyone who does so should either post here or ping every participant of this AfD. Nosebagbear (talk) 16:13, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles Treger

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not notable, no references Fuddle (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Fuddle (talk) 13:17, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, joke article. Caro7200 (talk) 13:36, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 13:49, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy delete yes a joke. Mccapra (talk) 13:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per WP:A7, no claim of significance. No sources as well. -- LuK3 (Talk) 14:22, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
More info: The page used to represent a different person: [1], changed by a new user. Revert and block user? Fuddle (talk)
Hallo, I wrote this page about an american violinist. Now it's about a different person (vandalism?). You don't need to delete this page, you can only come back to my version. --Etup45 (talk) 16:51, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close and revert vandalism. Although the actual subject of the article may fail GNG as well, that should be discussed on its own merits in a new AfD, not based on some vandal's work. Smartyllama (talk) 18:14, 16 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Close, but no Tregar.~~ I've reverted the vandalism and restored the violist/professor. Delete that persion or redirect to Henryk Wieniawski Violin Competition#1962. I found one New York Times article,[2] (alas behind a paywall), but that's about it, so WP:BIO isn't satisfied. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:24, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep the violinist per Zingarese. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:32, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is completely inappropriate to be discussing two different people in the same AfD as if they are one. Let's do this the right way - speedily close this, and Clarityfiend can immediately renominate if they so choose, or just be bold and create a redirect. Smartyllama (talk) 12:14, 17 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close One NY Times article and that's about it? That is a lie...there are literally more than TEN pages of results in the NY Times alone of articles about him or where he is mentioned. Also as the winner of a major music competition (the Wieniawski), meets WP:MUSICBIO #9. To Fuddle, please be careful next time. It is your responsibility to make sure the article you are nominating is not a vandalized version that has gone unnoticed. People who participate in these discussions usually won't check that. It's also utterly disgraceful and speaks volumes about the current state of this wonderful project that this act of vandalism was allowed to stay up for 3 days. Zingarese talk · contribs 15:23, 17 April 2020 (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.