Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jim Martell


 * 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 merge/redirect to Grizzly-polar bear hybrid. --Ezeu 18:33, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Jim Martell
Non-notable person — Preceding unsigned comment added by RupertMillard (talk • contribs)


 * Merge with [[Grizzly-polar bear hybrid] Genius_by_DESIGN ... :) thank U for this great educational forum :)
 * Merge with Grizzly-polar bear hybrid — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.172.48.67 (talk • contribs) 18:29, 12 May 2006
 * Merge as above. (I am the nominator, but a bit slow as this is the first time I've nominated something.) RupertMillard (Talk) 18:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongly Oppose Deletion. Would be better if this page can be improved. For all we know, Jim Martell, may be in a few years, be regarded as the first person to conclusively get a specimen of Grizzly-polar bear hybrid.Krooks 18:47, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grizzly-polar bear hybrid. He may be regarded as notable in the future, but that's not an argument for keeping the article now. What's not pure news just duplicates what's on the animal's page. Electrolite 19:54, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Oppose - In my view, any person, just because he is a hunter, cannot be termed as an "Non-notable person. Selfish animal abuser. " There have been several hunters in the histroy of man kind, like Jim Corbett, who have killed animals not only for pleasure but also for sport. Anyway, till any strong evidence of Jim Martell's animal abuse is presented, I would like to strongly oppose the request for deletion.Jordy 18:21, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Above vote was actually entered by at 18:50, 12 May 2006. There is a User:Jordy, but that user has been inactive since July, 2005. I've also reordered the comments to the order they were entered. - Fan1967 19:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Apparently the user copied his vote from the article talk page, picking up his nickname (Jordy) but not username from his signature. Fan1967 19:27, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment I did copy my comments from the article talk page. And I donot have any clue on who is User:Jordy.Jordy 20:08, 12 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge - the only claim to notability is that this person shot the bear, we probably cannot find anything more encyclopedic about this person anyway to warrant an article. Merging simply means that the content will be kept in Grizzly-polar bear hybrid instead of being spanned over two articles. --HappyCamper 19:06, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grizzly-polar bear hybrid. The same story is basically already told there, and quite frankly it's the bear that's notable, not the hunter. Fan1967 19:11, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge as per Fan1967--the bear is notable here, not the hunter. -- stubblyh ea d | T/c 19:19, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grizzly-polar bear hybrid. Shooting stuff shouldn't make you famous. --Sheldonc 19:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - Seems to have been a legitimate news story in Canada, and it is well-cited. --Zpb52 19:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It is a legitimate news story, but the bear is the subject, not the hunter, and all this information is duplicated at Grizzly-polar bear hybrid. &mdash; AKADriver &#x260E;  20:15, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Grizzly-polar bear hybrid; nothing notable about this guy that isn't covered there already. Catamorphism 20:32, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per above. He's not notable outside of the context of this news item.  KleenupKrew 20:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge or Keep. The article contains valuable and well-sourced information, but it can probably be merged. --Jannex 20:43, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge I seriously don't think that this man is worth note, like was said earlier, its the bear thats the important thing. fslav88
 * Merge per above. Aecis AppleknockerFlophouse 22:42, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per HappyCamper Ben 23:13, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect. If he kills something else rare, then maybe he's notable enough for a standalone article. ScottW 00:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merege and redirect As said befor it's the bear not the hunter that's the story. Airport Manager 01:31, 13 May 2006 (UTC) Sorry I was in the wrong browser. I knew I'd do that eventually. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 01:33, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge - article seems to be only about the incident with the cross breed bear, so it should be merged with the article about that bear. DanielZimmerman 03:51, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge per HappyCamper Miguel Andrade 20:41, 13 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge for reasons already cited. Balok 02:15, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge. The bear is encyclopedic; the hunter is a footnote. Bearcat 03:07, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongly support merge or deletion, for reasons amply discussed. Just out of curiosity, how many one-of-kind animals do you have to kill to be notable? Durito 05:30, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * 32 large animals, 64 middle-sized animals or 96 small animals ;) Aecis AppleknockerFlophouse 18:26, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge as per reasons cited Cogitus 10:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge because right now it's just duplicated information. If he causes the extinction of any more living species, he'll have earned his own page. Dybeck 11:40, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - completely NN. In a week he's out of the news and totally forgotten. --P199 21:28, 14 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge - everything notable is or should be in the hybrid article. TastyCakes 21:19, 15 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Merge per many good reasons given above. - Torgo 19:20, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * In fact I would also advocate that per above, this article be retained only as a redirect to the hybrid page. - Torgo 19:23, 16 May 2006 (UTC) (forgot to sign)


 * Merge for reasons cited above. Michbich 21:01, 16 May 2006 (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.