Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dicky Pontilli


 * 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. Speedy delete tag was improperly removed, but am closing this as an AfD rather than A7 as it gives a greater permanence to the close. Euryalus (talk) 22:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Dicky Pontilli

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested speedy deletion, just don't see anything notable about this person. VegasCasinoKid (talk) 11:15, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete Not sure what this is about - appears to be about two people, but doesn't even give their full names. There are no references and nothing to suggest notability. Suspect it's just teenage nonsense.  Neiltonks (talk) 12:19, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete for obvious CSD:A7 reasons. Not sure why there was even a need to take it to afd: speedy tag was improperly removed by creator. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 12:36, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete with the speed of light This is the word article I have ever seen in Wikipedia, ever. It not only is about two totally unnoteworthy teenagers, it does not even attempt to make them seem at all noteworthy. We get no information about them doing things like attending school even. Just that they use facebook and snap chat. It is technically two people, although that just makes it even less clear what is up with the name. what is the last name Pontilli, is it the last name of Ricky, or of Danielle, or some sophemoric combination of the two last names. I do not think I have ever seen an article this bad, ever.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:07, 1 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment This article tells me we should have higher standards for article creation. The creator has made 3 edits, creating this page, making an edit to this page, and adding this name into the article on Cupid. I think we need to make a required number ofedits before creation of a first page on Wikipedia. As I said above this is by far the worst page I have ever seen. I guess in some ways hoaxes are worse, especially deliberate ones that survive for months, but at least they are not as banal and useless. Also they generally do not so lack in encyclopedic style.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:11, 1 July 2016 (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.