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 Speedy Delete per CSD a7. Non-admin closure.--JForget 00:22, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dylan murray[edit]

Dylan murray (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Fails WP:NOR, WP:VERIFIABLE, WP:NPOV, and probably WP:AUTO or similar. Questionable notability and the content of the article at the moment is mostly nonsense. The article does, however, assert notability and Google does turn up hits for a young squash player named Dylan murray. I considered tagging the article for improvement, but as it stands no article is better than this article hanging around. Markdsgraham 18:48, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete. Drivel like this does not even need to be discussed on AfD. The best way to get rid of this sort of thing it to shove one of the several applicable "db" tags on it. --DanielRigal 18:58, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment That is my instinct as well. I'm still a relative novice and could not see a criteria that applied directly, since there is a not incredible assertion of notability. What is the appropriate action in these cases? --Markdsgraham 19:04, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
    • In theory, your approach is closer to following the rules than mine but my view is that Wikipedia is in danger of being deluged in nonsense unless we are quite tough with new articles. I would have put the best of the "db" tags on or just put db-reason with a short explanation. I know we shouldn't be too trigger happy but everything gets looked at by an admin before it gets deleted (so it isn't liek the person tagging it is judge, jury and executioner) and an article with no merit (even on a subject which deserves an article) is best got rid of as quickly as possible.--DanielRigal 19:11, 16 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. No merit but doesn't seem eligible for speedy to me. —David Eppstein 01:41, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:27, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete, if not Speedy Delete. Clearly a hoax and/or COI, something made up in school one day. Approaches CSD G1 (patent nonsense) and CSD A7 (non-assertion of notability of a person). The whole school is getting a good laugh out of this one, and mostly at Wikipedia's expense. --T-dot ( ^Talk/contribs ) 15:15, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete There is one fact that can be verified as a Dylan Murray did win a final at the Dutch and Pioneer Juniors, but he wouldn't pass WP:N quite yet. FlowerpotmaN·(t) 21:02, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy Delete Most of it is blatant nonsense.--JForget 23:58, 17 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've just put a CSD 7 tag on it, although I could have easily put a G1 tag too. Loks definitely nonsense after a second reading--JForget 00:00, 18 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete. Oh please. This is such obvious bullshit I think we can all agree to skip the formalities. I imagine that WP:IAR was established for this very reason? Burntsauce 00:02, 18 September 2007 (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.