Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lyle Stevik (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 keep. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 02:39, 8 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lyle Stevik

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Utterly non-notable subject with no coverage outside of missing persons databases. No significant coverage from reliable sources. Surprised that it survived AFD the first time given the paucity of sourcing, Wikipedia is not a newspaper regardless of how well formatted an article is. - hahnch e n 21:08, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Everymorning talk 21:18, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Editors unanimously agreed on notability, see previous discussion. Article meets notability standards as the case is unusual, as the victim is unidentified, etc. I'm sure @User:BabbaQ, @Ceradon: and @Davey2010: also agree.--GouramiWatcher^(?) 01:54, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - There was an AfD process just a little while back with a clear Keep consensus. This article meets WP:GNG.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:31, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - This article was determined to meet Wikipedia's guidelines in the last debate, and voted to be kept. Because of the circumstances surrounding this subject's notability, this article serves as importance in helping to secure an identification.-- Transylvanian Thunderbolt (talk) 2:42, 1 April 2015 (UTC)

Comment For those who have commented, please give feedback for the AFDs for Tempe Girl and Pemiscot County Does as well. @BabbaQ: and @Transylvanian Thunderbolt:.--GouramiWatcher^(?) 18:42, 3 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:22, 4 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This vote may be being subject to brigading: https://www.reddit.com/r/UnresolvedMysteries/comments/31hah4/lyle_steviks_wikipedia_page_has_been_targeted_for/ Stolitsa740 (talk) 13:48, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I know, I don't think the users that have commented are involved with the Reddit page. I have yet to see a comment made after the post was created. Probably shouldn't get too worked up until after people from the Reddit page start adding posts.--GouramiWatcher^(?) 16:54, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken, however I believe this should be mentioned, as it could possibly distort the results of the vote. Stolitsa740 (talk) 23:14, 5 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It is the way you look at it I guess. Distort, help getting more thoughts for this AfD etc.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this article has also appeared at the DYK section. Which also indicates that the article are of an accepted standard.--BabbaQ (talk) 15:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- The DYK nomination made no judgement on the notability of the subject, and deferred judgement to the first afd. Given that I'm nominating it again, I clearly think the first AFD was godawful and engaged by only with those keen on turning Wikipedia into an indiscriminate WP:DIRECTORY. - hahnch e n 18:03, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Basically you did not like them voting Keep. But that is the good thing about consensus. It gives a consensus.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:45, 6 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is clearly forum shopping by hahnchen to impose his subjective (not objective) view of what Wikipedia should be. Paul Austin (talk) 03:55, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know what other forums I've shopped this at, but you're free to throw that accusation if it goes to DRV. - hahnch e n 11:06, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Keep again per WP:VICTIM, WP:ONEEVENT and WP:GNG - Notability is there so again seeing no reason to delete. –Davey2010^Talk 21:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- Care to explain how? - hahnch e n 22:29, 7 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

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.