Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Littel (surname)


 * 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 keep as disambiguation page. Closing per consensus among all participants, after renaming and cleaning up the article. (non-admin closure) gidonb (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Littel (surname)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non-notable list. It appears to be a list of people with the surname "Littel", but only lists two non-notable people without their own articles from the 16th and 19th centuries - can't find anyone else (with articles) with that exact surname. Only source given is someone's personal website about their family. Also see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/User:¹ articles - this current article may be the "Littel" article listed there.  Seagull123  Φ  19:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  Seagull123  Φ  19:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions.  Seagull123  Φ  19:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. <b style="background:#304747;color:#BED6D6"> Seagull123 </b><b style="color:#304747"> Φ </b> 19:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment - I did find Emlen T. Littel for what it's worth, but no other articles with that surname. Chris857 (talk) 21:41, 23 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Rename to Littel. We can add Emlen T. Littel and make it a disambiguation page between the person and the house. More articles will follow at another time. Should also remove the entire paragraph with Dutch stuff. gidonb (talk) 03:56, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment. I believe that the above is a rare trivial outcome and that the interest of the WP user to receive a good article without WP:OR and trivia takes priority. Hence, I made the above changes. If someone disagrees these can be rolled back. The added value is that participants can see where I wanted to take this. In any case, the closing editor and the disambiguation reviewer will take another look. gidonb (talk) 17:26, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Tagging all others in this discussion: Seagull123 and Chris857. gidonb (talk) 17:28, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * And also those who discussed on the talk page: Cullen328 and Mac_Henni. gidonb (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Based on how the page is now, I would be fine with ending the AFD (is this a case of WP:HEY?) Chris857 (talk) 18:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Chris857, thank you! If you have added the close buttons, you can close yourself. Otherwise, you may want to ask for (speedy) keep based on the progress of the article. gidonb (talk) 22:10, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I agree with you and, based on the current page, it seems fine to keep it, in my opinion. As I'm the nominator here, I'm not sure how this works, does WP:WDAFD apply here? <b style="background:#304747;color:#BED6D6"> Seagull123 </b><b style="color:#304747"> Φ </b> 23:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * . I have !voted so technically I shouldn't close. hasn't !voted, only commented, so he'd be the best man for the job. Otherwise I'll be bold again and go ahead anyway! gidonb (talk) 23:44, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
 * OK, going ahead anyway per consensus among participants. gidonb (talk) 01:08, 25 December 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.