Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Starling

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 19:05, 21 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Starling

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

Fails

WP:GNG. Another vanity article created and largely edited by SPA socks, which were discovered by Softlavender. Same socks also responsible for Hank Bergman and Sherman Bergman articles, which are also currently nominated. Coverage consists of local newspaper obits, minor local coverage re: subject's time as a charter boat captain and two unconfirmed mentions in Ring Magazine. It appears that all three articles were created to promo subjects who had all been long-time teachers with the Miami-Dade County Public Schools. X4n6 (talk) 04:51, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sportspeople-related deletion discussions. X4n6 (talk) 04:51, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Odd promo/vanity article about a dabbler and so-called "colorful personality" who lacks notability in any area and who fails GNG and other notability standards. Softlavender (talk) 06:04, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: On most all the articles this user (FranciscoFWPerez) has created, instead of doing his own research and providing his own citations, he seems to be copy-pasting the References/Sources list on each individual bio article directly from that person's entry in http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Main_Page. -- Softlavender (talk) 06:26, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Martial arts-related deletion discussions. Peter Rehse (talk) 22:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Non-notable as a boxer or anything else.Peter Rehse (talk) 22:07, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No significant independent coverage. Doesn't meet the notability standards for any position. A few local color stories don't show notability.Mdtemp (talk) 08:26, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Delete seems to have had a very interesting life but he fails WP:BOX and WP:GNG sadly.--Donniediamond (talk) 12:52, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
SNOW 'Delete as this clearly needs to be restarted if there are to be any notability signs, even minimally. SwisterTwister talk 05:46, 21 March 2016 (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.