Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John "Holy" MacKenaw

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 beaten like a rented mule.-Wafulz (talk) 16:43, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

John "Holy" MacKenaw

Unreferenced stub about a non-notable athlete. Article says he hardly played any games, and almost 100 years ago. My Google search turned up no results for this name (only results for the "Holy Mackinaw" oski yell)...and a search for "John MacKenaw" without the Holy in it turned up a grand total of two results. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 23:52, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep A search on the Toronto Maple Leafs site for their 1918-1919 roster doesn't list him. A similar search on NHL.com was equally fruitless. However, this is not definitive as the records from that era are likely incomplete, and sources are likely to be in newspapers. Per WP:ATHLETE, he would meet the criterion for playing at the top level of his sport. Given that the article is brand new and has not had a chance for references to be researched, and the difficulty of doing the research, it shoulod kept to give it a chance. -- Whpq (talk) 00:53, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Full disclosure: I have long believed that the standards for WP:ATHLETE are too lax (compared to standards for academics or various other kinds of people).... I was trying not to make a POINTy nom with this, though, as i really do believe there are notability concerns...I just figure I should get that out there so you know. This isn't the place for me to talk about whether or not WP:ATHLETE is a good standard, so I'll keep my mouth shut for now :). Politizer ^talk/_contribs 01:00, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
While I respect the obvious determination of Whpq and Politzer to assume good faith here, a hockey player who isn't even listed in the historical records of the team he purportedly played for is at least as likely to be a hoax as a historical oversight — and given that fact, in the absence of actual references I really don't think we can assume that he's a real person who's been missed by the history books rather than a figment of somebody's imagination. Delete unless references can be added to confirm that he ever actually existed. Bearcat (talk) 02:57, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete The amount of games is irrelevant three games with a notable club makes someone notable. Unfortunately, LexisNexis turned up nothing either; unverifiable. - Mgm|^(talk) 10:30, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Athletes-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:44, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Hockey-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 11:45, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Doing a google search for John "Holy" Mackenaw and a search with the last name variant Mackinaw leaves me believing that we have a WP:HOAX here. Not just for the lack of information on a Hockey player, but for the links that are available that seem to reference the exclamation "Holy Makinaw!". Smells fishy to me. --Pparazorback (talk) 13:05, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Soon as I saw the name I knew it was a hoax. -Djsasso (talk) 13:31, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, Hoax and a particularly lame joke. It's a play on the Maple Leaf's play by play man's ridiculous love for the phrase "Holy Mackinaw". I'm also rather surprised that nobody else has yet mentioned that there was no such team as the Toronto Maple Leafs in 1918-19. Reso lute 15:03, 23 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Gotta love Joe Bowen's classic Oski Yell. Good observation by Resolute as well, definate HOAX article here. – Nurmsook! ^talk... 16:31, 23 January 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.