Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bishop Althon


 * 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 of the debate was delete as unverified. Sjakkalle (Check!)  13:11, 4 January 2006 (UTC)

Bishop Althon
This article was originally nominated for a speedy. This just barely squeaks by my A7 criteria, and I thought I'd send it here to be sure. This stub attempts to establish notability, however fleeting, by mentioning that his mother is related to royalty. --Deathphoenix 16:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * No vote, but even if this article is kept, it should be renamed to Johannes Althon. --Deathphoenix 16:19, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete following comments below and some minor checking of my own. --Deathphoenix 21:16, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, bishops are notable, especially 15th century ones, where the potential for vanity is reduced. Kappa 16:26, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete' if not verified, keep if verified. Kappa 22:21, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete doesn't meet WP:CSD A7 in my book. --Pboyd04 16:34, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The article implicitly asserts that this person is a person who has become a part of the enduring historical record, and who thus satisfies the WP:BIO criteria. That speedy deletion criterion cannot therefore apply. Uncle G 19:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * It's depressing that a criterion introduced to remove junk added by college kids is being used to prevent coverage of 15th century religious figures. Kappa 16:40, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Unverifiable from here so needs sourcing (a linked articles cites Copenhagen Cathedral Guidebook, 2003). If properly sourced I'd change to a weak keep.    Dl yo ns 493   Ta lk  16:54, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * wish I could find him, but I can't. If someone can provide some verification I'd vote keep but for now Delete Jcuk 18:28, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This is nowhere close to a speedy. But this and the linked Martin Halderson (by the same author) should be deleted unless properly verified. I suspect this is a hoax. The reference for Martin Halderson is "Copenhagen Cathedral Guidebook, 2003", but the catalogue of the Danish Royal Library finds no book with that title, which makes the reference either false or at least (if it is an obscure brochure) useless for verification purposes. I can't find either this bishop or Martin Halderson in Dansk Biografisk Lexikon, the Danish National Dictionary of Biography (the link goes to a digitized 19th c. edition, but the age of the edition shouldn't matter in this case). It might also be pointed out that there was no medieval Copenhagen Cathedral - Copenhagen belonged to the Diocese of Roskilde until 1924. u p p l a n d 18:53, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * The problem here is that we cannot just accept articles like this on trust. It is unfortunately true that people like to add fake historical figures to Wikipedia.  (Witness the number of times that fake Byzantine emperors have been added to Michael.)  This article cites no sources, and, like Dlyons493, Jcuk and (I see after the edit conflict) u p p l a n d, I have been unable to find any sources.  The article is unverifiable. Delete. Uncle G 19:05, 29 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Having trouble verifying this one. And I'm not sure I believe in the "Copenhagen Cathedral Guidebook"-- apparently the present cathedral in Copenhagen was built in the 19th century.  Now, it might have a list of all bishops in it, but I wouldn't be too sure.  Here's the website for the cathedral, if anyone is interested: http://www.koebenhavnsdomkirke.dk/infouk.asp Crypticfirefly 07:47, 30 December 2005 (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.