Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Stadel

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 United States at the 1904 Summer Olympics#Tennis. history remains under the redirect should GNG compliant sourcing eventually be found. Star Mississippi 03:18, 13 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

George Stadel

[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)

Fails WP:GNG, as they lack significant coverage. A search for results from St. Louis reveals some passing mentions to 1906 tennis results that could be in reference to him, but there are no other possibly relevant results, including globally in 1904, and globally in 1952, the year of his death.

Passing WP:NATH, but per WP:NSPORTS this only provides a presumption of notability, and thus WP:GNG is required to be met - although the presumption does mean an AFD rather than a Prod is required. BilledMammal (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Connecticut-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. BilledMammal (talk) 03:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete clearly does not pass GNG. I also would add that considering that we decided Olympians are not default notable for competing, only for medaling, we probably should change all other references to the Olympics to either limit it to medalers, or at least something less comprehensive than just competing, since we decided that just competing is not enough. For what it is worth the 1904 Olympics were barely more than an American competition, with several events having only American competitors, and some team competitions featuring multiple teams from various cities in the US, in fact a few competitions may have only featured teams from St. Louis iteslef, many of these teams were sponsered by the Turners organzations, which we have an article on which neglects to mention their role in the 1904 Olymics (at least it as of last week, I did not check it again just now).John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:35, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to United States at the 1904 Summer Olympics#Tennis if nothing can be found on him per WP:ATD and WP:PRESERVE. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 14:51, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- We should not try to preserve links about people who are totally non-notable. I strenuously object to making this a rdirect, which is evidently what needs to be done to stop people from turning Wikipedia into a huge collections of redirects about non-notable people.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:30, 3 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 06:59, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect per Lugnuts, a redirect makes sense as an WP:ATD. There is no problem with non-notable subjects being redirected, that happens all the time on Wikipedia. NemesisAT (talk) 10:40, 10 February 2022 (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.