Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Parker (shipwrecked)


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 23:27, 10 February 2015 (UTC)

Richard Parker (shipwrecked)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has had a notability tag at various times in its existence, but the notability has never been demonstrated. That is, there is no notable connection between the people described. StAnselm (talk) 06:07, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. While I find this article and its precision about who was and was not cannibalized hilarious, there's no connection between these individuals other than the Life of Pi character being named after the cabin boy, which is or can be adequately handled in their articles. The regular dab page takes care of the rest. –Roscelese (talk &sdot; contribs) 20:30, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: as much as I like it; and at the risk of doing current and future Richard Parkers the disservice of eliminating this warning of the karmic likelihood of being eaten; I think it needs to go (per WP:SYNTHESIS). Vrac (talk) 21:26, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Chew up and spit out. It's superfluous as the entries either already exist in Richard Parker or could be added (only the Poe character seems worthwhile, so I'm going to add it). Clarityfiend (talk) 03:08, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Neutral As the main instigator of the article, I wouldn't want to vote pro domo; just a few notes: Of course, there is nothing supernatural between the number of Richard Parkers involved in the various calamities; it's purely concidence. But I had noted there seems to be come confusion between the various RP's and the shipwrecks in which they were (or were not) involved, so I thought it was worthwhile to disentangle the mess a bit, and to place it in a "central" location. The page's intention is to act as a kind of "sophisticated disambiguation". Two cents. --Syzygy (talk) 12:10, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:18, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:18, 4 February 2015 (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.