Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don Thompson (racing)


 * 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. ✗ plicit  23:49, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Don Thompson (racing)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NSPORTS. Disputed draftification, so here we are at AfD. If I draftified this I would be move warring 🇺🇦 Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople and Motorsport. 🇺🇦  Fiddle Timtrent  Faddle Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:46, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Original dratifier here - the page creator has created several other similar articles, which might need dratified or deleted. I only did one because I didn't want to get bit for mass dratifying. As for my !vote, I'd have to say weak delete for now.  Kirbanzo  (talk - contribs) 20:49, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - No sources appear to exist which satisfy GNG and no claim to significance is made in the article. subject is a part-time driver in a 4th-tier racing series (equal to High-A in baseball or League 2 in English football) and has very low WP:POTENTIAL to meet GNG in the future, thus making a draft also inappropriate in my opinion. According to their Racing-Reference entry (a primary source ineligible for establishing notability), they have competed in a total of 21 races over 10 years. NMOTORSPORT is not met. Wikipedia is not Racing-Reference. - "Ghost of  Dan Gurney"  23:06, 13 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete—I found what appear to be his LinkedIn and a pic on his Facebook, plus another database, but no evidence of extended coverage of his racing career. I'm going to add both databases to the article, since this is an unreferenced BLP with a DOB. Why wasn't it PROD'ed as such? If there are indeed more of these in mainspace, they should be BLP-PROD'ed immediately. Yngvadottir (talk) 07:48, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The creator reverted the draftification after 2 minutes, so to me at least, it seems like a safe bet that they would have dePRODed for the same reason as their revert. - "Ghost of  Dan Gurney"  15:00, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Possibly. When I looked at their talk page, I saw that the importance of its being a BLP with no sources was there in the notice of draftification, but was not so emphatic that a new user would necessarily have realized that is a serious policy violation here. I have now spelled that out in a note at the bottom of the page. However, BLP-PROD is explicitly different from other PRODS in this respect: see the intro and the section on removal, the tag must be reinstated if there is still no source (no reliable source, in fact). If this editor's other articles are the same, they're all BLP-PRODable, and the person needs to stop creating unsourced BLPs in mainspace immediately. That takes priority over notability, I believe. (If there are database entries on all these people that include their dates of birth, then we don't have a violation of privacy of non-public individuals, unless the databases are as unreliable as IMDb, which from your !vote I gather is not the case? But we still in that case have obvious BLP violations, and if they're all like this, they should be treated as such. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:55, 19 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:NOTDATABASE 79.73.102.134 (talk) 10:37, 20 April 2022 (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.