Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics (2nd nomination)


 * 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. The BLP concerns in the article's history, as well as the state of the article after the BLP concerns have been resolved remain to be problematic. As the information that is left may be worthy of inclusion elsewhere, I will provide the text to interested editors who wish to use it for the expansion of related articles. Shereth 17:33, 18 August 2008 (UTC)

Scandals of the 2004 Summer Olympics
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

There are no references whatsoever for the article, which is rather worrying as it largely focuses on living people. Furthermore, it inherently violates WP:WTA, and I don't see what's so scandalous about the trademark ban or the existence of tougher drug tests. Sceptre (talk) 14:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - The first point of the Afd regarding no references is wrong. They are all at the bottom of the article. What is needed is in text references, but that is something to clean up, not delete over. The second point is also an area for article improvement not deletion. Finally, the last point is opinion (WP:IDONTLIKEIT). Sceptre has not given any valid reason why the article should be deleted. Should it be re-written?  Yes - it is a mess. But once again, not a reason for deletion.  It looks like someone is already working on cleaning it up, too. Turlo Lomon (talk) 18:10, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I cleared out the worst of it. I'd suggest renaming it to 2004 Summer Olympics incidents (or some such) and doing a little more cleanup. RxS (talk) 18:33, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - I agree that a name change using a less weasly word is appropriate. Turlo Lomon (talk) 18:51, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Speedy delete is required by WP:BLP, since it makes very damaging statements about living athletes which lack any inline citations. The BLP policy requires that "badly written biographies of living persons should be stubbed or deleted (see WP:BLP)." Making a lot of statements of guilt for various rule violations and then just listing some references at the bottom of the page is completely unacceptable. I have blanked the text, per WP:BLP. Edison (talk) 19:42, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Most if not all the remaining items I left had appropriate references in each of the athletes articles. Should be easy enough to recreate should someone be interested. RxS (talk) 20:03, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * I am very uncomfortable leaving only one person listed, since only one claim had a reference specifically to it. Recreating with refs from the articles about the various athletes or officials would be preferable to leaving one lone person. The refs at the bottom only included 2 which worked, and one was About.com, which might not constitute a reliable source for this. I do not see enough left in the present BLP compliant article to justify keeping. Edison (talk) 20:23, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as trimming for BLP has left the article with virtually no content and the one remaining listing is dubious. (Although I should say that I'm surprised none of the so-called scandals were notable enough to have sources; I would hope the BLP deletions occurred after a good faith search for sources because normally there should be many sources related to the Olympics, even if link rot is taken into account.) 23skidoo (talk) 12:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I agree with Turlo Lumon's assessment. We ought to improve the article with in-line citations from reputable sources.  The article is a meaningful one that can provide an excellent repository of historical information that would be difficult to compile elsewhere.  I'm neutral on the idea of whether the article needs to be renamed or not.  I only suggest that we use a format similar to that used by other "olympic scandals"/"olympic incidents" articles for other games.  I agree with Edison's sentiments, although I believe that assigning it to an Olympics-related Wikiproject to find citations for the recently-deleted lists of "scandals" would be preferable to deleting the article.  This information will be tougher to compile as the years go by and as information fades.Davemcarlson (talk) 11:34, 16 August 2008 (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.