Jump to content 
Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Kellogg
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 as rewritten. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 20:33, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Peter Kellogg[edit]
- Delete Not notable in his own right. Being the son of a wealthy man is not enough for an encyclopedia entry. I recommend redirecting the link to his fathers entry Jimbo68 12:27, 19 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 12:15, 20 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete; fails WP:BIO. — pd_THOR | =/\= | 14:32, 20 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]Redirect per nom. — Haeleth Talk 21:20, 20 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Having been asked to explain my vote, I observe on further inspection that his father (to which I thought the article should be redirected) doesn't actually have an article to redirect to, while the company mentioned -- which might have been the other logical target -- has only a one-line stub. This therefore appears to be the most detailed entry on any of the related subjects. I remain of the opinion that a single article on the Kelloggs would be preferable to several, but as we don't have several, there doesn't seem to be any such problem. I am therefore changing my vote to keep and expand, at least for now; perhaps the father could also be discussed in this context, to give a broader, more detailed article. — Haeleth Talk 15:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Comment for further clarification: since a redirect would make no sense when the only possible target article does not mention this man at all, the minimal sensible outcome, if the consensus is to delete or redirect, would be to merge this with the article on the company. — Haeleth Talk 15:21, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Having been asked to explain my vote, I observe on further inspection that his father (to which I thought the article should be redirected) doesn't actually have an article to redirect to, while the company mentioned -- which might have been the other logical target -- has only a one-line stub. This therefore appears to be the most detailed entry on any of the related subjects. I remain of the opinion that a single article on the Kelloggs would be preferable to several, but as we don't have several, there doesn't seem to be any such problem. I am therefore changing my vote to keep and expand, at least for now; perhaps the father could also be discussed in this context, to give a broader, more detailed article. — Haeleth Talk 15:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Delete and redirect per nom -- Alias Flood 01:30, 21 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]- Keep per expansion and cited notability -- Alias Flood 01:01, 26 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Delete; fails WP:BIO. JeffMurph 08:34, 24 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Comment: Note that the article has been considerably improved since the above "delete" votes were cast: a number of previously absent claims of notability have been added. If the closing admin is inclined to delete, I would strongly urge re-listing first, to ensure that any consensus is based on a fair evaluation of the expanded article. — Haeleth Talk 14:48, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Keep. Article looks good now, and notability is proven with references. Natgoo 19:10, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
- Keep rewritten article is clearly verifiable and based on reliable sources. Eluchil404 22:29, 25 July 2006 (UTC)Reply[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.
No comments:
Post a Comment