Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Richter


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 12:39, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

William Richter

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article was made by an overambitious assistant. Williamrichter (talk) 17:32, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 17:36, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:26, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- -- Cirt (talk) 17:58, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 18:03, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Question Just who is the editor Williamrichter? This account created the article early in 2009 and has edited it many times since.  Now, we have a deletion nomination from the same account saying the article was created by an "overambitious assistant".  Are two people using this account, namely the subject himself and the assistant?  How do we know who is editing here?  Perhaps the subject is notable, perhaps now.  But we need to understand what's going on here before deciding whether to delete. Cullen328 (talk) 03:23, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * No we don't. The only pertinent question is whether reliable and independent sources exist.  Waffling over the identity of the person operating the account is, in essence, avoiding that question for no good reason.  It's possible to look for the existence of such sources without even caring who the accountholder is. Uncle G (talk) 10:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'd like to suggest that is not entirely correct. For marginal BLPs there appears to be (from what I've seen) a community leaning to deletion when privacy may be an issue. (issues about two people using an account should be dealt with elsewhere if needed.) (haven't had a good look at article so no comment on deletion.) duffbeerforme (talk) 13:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Who the nominator is isn't relevant, as you can't opt out of your own article anyway. Regardless, this article shows no evidence of meeting our notability guidelines and should therefore be deleted. - DustFormsWords (talk) 06:14, 20 December 2010 (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.