Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Gloryhunter


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 22:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The Gloryhunter

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This has been tagged as a hoax: I don't think it's that, but I don't think it's notable either. The guy decided to pick a football team at random and support them till they lost a game, when he would transfer his loyalty to the winners. That's all. Sources are two blogs and Facebook; from the first blog it seems he has hopes of selling a book about his "epic journey". Delete as not notable. JohnCD (talk) 21:51, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Might not be a hoax, but not notable in any case. Looie496 (talk) 00:21, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete The article is clearly not notable.--Ped Admi (talk) 01:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails WP:BIO. Schuy m 1  ( talk ) 01:18, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football related deletions. ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:14, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. This certainly isn't a hoax but at the moment this subject just isn't notable, it's just a football blog. However, according to the ITV website a book is being released at the end of the season, so MAYBE this subject will become notable in the future. Maybe... Bettia   (rawr!)  09:28, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable. Appears to be self created page looking at author name and contributions, bit WP:ONEEVENTish, unlikely to stand the test of time per Notability is not temporary. Another case of 15 minutes of fame. -- Club Oranje Talk 11:43, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as currently non-notable. However, if a book is published, TV show made etc., IN THE FUTURE then it could be notable THEN. GiantSnowman 12:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - if the problem is sourcing, I'm pretty sure I've seen an article on this on FourFourTwo. I reckon I still have that issue and will try to bring more details. Unsure if it is considered enough to warrant notability here or if we should wait for other publications, if and when they arrive. Kaizeler (talk) 13:06, 9 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per above. Govvy (talk) 18:11, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Maybe if we'd heard something about his quest other than the original news article and his blog... You just can't force something to become notable.  It either is or it isn't.  GreyWyvern (talk) 15:01, 9 January 2009 (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.