Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alex Gurteen


 * 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. SNOW. conclusion is obvious.  DGG ( talk ) 00:05, 27 December 2017 (UTC)

Alex Gurteen

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Self-authored article about non-notable person. PeterTheFourth (talk) 14:34, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * CommentI would have rather waited a week, but at this time I would have to say delete as there is zero evidence of any notability beyond what many armature (and none notable) athletes have. |What we have is some YouTube clips, and a list of minor race wins.Slatersteven (talk) 14:40, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. L3X1  (distænt write)  14:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. L3X1  (distænt write)  14:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. L3X1  (distænt write)  14:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. L3X1  (distænt write)  14:46, 23 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I appreciate that editors may disagree on the level if notability required for a Wikipedia article. However, the East Surrey League is a major adult athletics league containing 3 races over the season. This is a notable achievement in my opinion. Not all editors may agree with this, but to start an AFD on this article for lack of notability is rather far fetched. I will add more notable running information and reliable sources over the coming days. This AFD is inappropriate, espevially due to the very short duration after the article creation . Oscar248 (talk) 15:27, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It might be worth noting there is an accusation of a COI with this users that have not addressed.Slatersteven (talk) 15:31, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * It is irrelevant who the author of the article is. Wikipedia should not discriminate based on the person who edits a Wikipedia page. The article should be judged on its content and potential for improvement. It is very sad to see the active efforts of editors to delete Alex Gurteen without making a constructive contribution to the article. It is not too late to change this fact. Wikipedia editors should contribute to Alex Gurteen to improve the article as much as possible. Oscar248 (talk) 15:52, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * As I said in my comment on the talk page I tried to find sources and could not.Slatersteven (talk) 15:53, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * That is absolutely fine, I will find some more over the coming days. Oscar248 (talk) 15:55, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Oscar248 has now admitted they are the subject of the article.Slatersteven (talk) 18:12, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No evidence of notability. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 19:27, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. The author's strange habit of referring to themselves in the third person aside, there is absolutely no indication of notability here, bordering on A7 territory. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 20:21, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. I checked the refs, they don't support notability. It is a vanity page about a nn individual. There is an outstanding COI. Unexceptional runner (age grade of many others is better), not a youtube personality (just 1000 subscribers). Szzuk (talk) 20:43, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that I can find. Nwlaw63 (talk) 23:36, 23 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment Alex Gurteen is an exceptional runner. This is evidenced by the 2015 reference of the East Surrey League race where Alex won the bronze medal. This AfD was put forward just 2 days after the page's creation. This seems to be a serious mistake considering the high level of notability of Mr Gurteen. I am trying to make the page more encyclopedic and I believe in the next week I can get the page up to a C class article. Oscar248 (talk) 00:01, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Referring to yourself in the third person isn't going to help you make your case. Notability is established by significant coverage in independent reliable sources, not you claiming that you are notable. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:22, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I only talk in the third person and will continue to so I am not discriminated against based on my identity. I just want to be treated like all the other editors. There are more references that exist of me which I will find. Also, lets examine the word 'notable' more closely. The word means a 'subject which can be noted'. It does not mean I have been noted. My unique variety of notable achievements means my page should clearly be kept. Oscar248 (talk) 19:51, 26 December 2017 (UTC).
 * I'm notable and I cannot lie, but the editors do deny, I'm exceptional and incredible when the people see this fact they get sprung Oscar248 (talk) 20:20, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Not in the context of Wikipedia's polices on notability WP:N, and note it is notability,
 * notability
 * nəʊtəˈbɪlɪti/Submit
 * noun
 * the fact or quality of being notable.
 * a famous or important person.
 * not
 * notable
 * ˈnəʊtəb(ə)l/Submit
 * adjective
 * worthy of attention or notice; remarkable.
 * noun
 * a famous or important person.
 * You are none of these, if you were RS would have reported on you and shouted your praises.Slatersteven (talk) 20:31, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep This article clearly meets the notability guidelines as per WP:NATH. Oscar248 (talk) 00:34, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Duplicate !vote struck. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:13, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * This does not fly. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 01:16, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails notability. MT TrainDiscuss 07:09, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete cannot find any way this passes WP:ATH -- Sh i r ik ( Questions or Comments? ) 11:51, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No significant coverage in any independent source. Not notable. --RexxS (talk) 19:00, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete The C of E declares that The C of E feels that the article written about Alex Gurteen does not meet Wikipedia's notability criteria as by no stretch of the imagination can one state earnestly that competing in a partial county athletics club fulfills WP:ATH nor does the sourcing meet GNG standards.  The C of E God Save the Queen!  ( talk ) 20:56, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per the declaration and feelings of C of E ... and the lack of significant coverage in multiple, reliable, and independent sources. Cbl62 (talk) 21:32, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Alex, you won a Christmas card competition and some athletics events. That's good, but to have a Wikipedia article it's necessary to meet the criteria for notability. Possibilities are WP:ARTIST and WP:ATHLETE. You don't meet any of the criteria for either. The final possibility, based on the online videos, is WP:ANYBIO. You don't meet any of the criteria for that either. Trying to change the criteria so that you do meet one of them is counterproductive. None of the votes here is a judgement on you as a person; it's just people applying the rules that exist. I hope you have a good Christmas. EddieHugh (talk) 22:06, 24 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. At last, someone less notable than me! Jack N. Stock (talk) 01:46, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete No independent coverage from reliable sources to meet WP:GNG and the achievement is far from enough to pass WP:ANYBIO. But based on the information available above and the age of the subject, I will advise the creator to read WP:AUTO and WP:YOUNG, as well as concentrate on his studies in school. Notability cannot be created. Ammarpad (talk) 14:21, 25 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Strong delete We have the rule against autobiographies for good reason. There are lots of people who think their actions, like being a moderator on a fan-fiction forum, make them notable, but this is not at all the case. Wikipedia is built around coverage of people by other people, not self promotion.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:22, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Runner fails GNG. L3X1 (distænt write)  15:43, 26 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - no significant in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Neutralitytalk 23:46, 26 December 2017 (UTC)


 * 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.