Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/John Critzos II (2nd nomination) - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Goodvac (talk | contribs) at 17:26, 10 November 2010 (John Critzos II: reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Revision as of 17:26, 10 November 2010 by Goodvac (talk | contribs) (John Critzos II: reply)(diff) ← Previous revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)

John Critzos II

AfDs for this article:
John Critzos II (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log) • Afd statistics
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non notable subject. No indication of importance. Vanity. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mephisto Panic (talkcontribs) 14:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC) This template must be substituted.

Keep - Sources are independent, credible, refer to other sources of notoriety, and seem to demonstrate notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.244.246.136 (talk) 21:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)


This template must be substituted.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:42, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Keep This article was just up for AfD a few months ago (I believe no consensus was reached), although that discussion seems to have been overwritten by this one. There seem to be enough independent sources to support notability. Papaursa (talk) 22:50, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:43, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Weak keep. A lot of the sources are not really helpful, lacking significant coverage and credibility as reliable sources. The usna.edu and dcmilitary.com cites seem to scrape by the GNG between them, though. —chaos5023 (talk) 03:38, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Speedy delete G11. Blatant advertising. Sentences such as "Few, if any, are able to boost the record Critzos accumulated as well as the time span during which he dominated." and "His technical ability was matched by few, if any" serve as a concrete foundation of my belief that this article is fundamentally unrescuable in its current state, plagued as it is by IP editors with obvious conflicts of interest. Does no-one else see a problem with this obvious, blatant advertising and the myriad of single purpose accounts - notably 96.244.246.136 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) - that seem to proliferate around the article and associated AfDs? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 04:14, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
    Sure, it's a problem, but it's a content problem, not an article-existence problem. Deletion isn't a way to address content issues. —chaos5023 (talk) 05:00, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Deletion is the correct way to address content issues like this one - when it's quite obviously a G11 candidate. If I thought it was rescuable, believe me I'd rescue it! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 14:40, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
I thought I'd done a halfway creditable job at that, really. Check the recent page history, see what you think. —chaos5023 (talk) 15:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Alright - the tone needs a bit of work there, but well done on cleaning it; you've swayed me! Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 15:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
Categories: