Project:Requests for deletion/Requests/2023/Aaron Buckingham
- The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
The outcome of this request for deletion was to File:Symbol delete vote.svg Delete. --Eptalon (talk) 22:25, 9 February 2023 (UTC)
Aaron Buckingham[change]
- Aaron Buckingham (edit · talk · history · links · watch · logs · delete) · close request
ImprovedWikiImprovment has nominated this page for deletion for the reason: Not quite suitable for A4 quick deletion, but the subject appears to not be notable. --IWI (talk) 16:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)
Please discuss this request below, but keep in mind that you shouldn't vote on everything and that there may be options other than "keep" or "delete", such as merging.
Discussion[change]
- File:Symbol speedy delete vote.svg Quick Delete The only claim in the article is that he was in a band (which I never heard of) that was active for 2 years almost 2 decades ago with no international hits.. and is gay. so.. no claim of notability at all so d-A4 is completely valid and he is completely not notable so it is a delete overall anyway. Pure Evil (talk) 04:30, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- Firstly, I don't see the relevance of the "gay" comment exactly, but I do hope you aren't suggesting that this would be a negative thing. In any case, you may not have heard of them, but being a member of a notable band is a "credible claim of significance", meaning A4 cannot apply. It is important to remember that A4 is based on the enwiki equivalent, and does not actually refer to whether the subject is notable or not, but whether the article claims the person could be significant enough to have an article. --IWI (talk) 04:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- For the record, I don't see an intentional diatribe or otherwise backhanded comment on the subject's gayness or sexual orientation. It is clumsily worded, at best... but I don't think Pure Evil meant any offense. The commentary was on the content of the page and not of the person. Operator873 connect 08:09, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- The point was that there are two things stated in the article: 1 he was in a band. 2. he was gay. Neither of these things are a claim of notability. A person is not inherently notable for being in a band. Nor is that person notable because of their choice in sexual partners. As those are the only two things covered by the article for this person, there is no valid claim of notability and therefore, A4 would be a valid reason for quick deletion. (and if anything in that was negative, it would be the "in a band" part.. Thankfully he seems to have been a singer and not .. a bassists.. or worse.. a drummer ) Pure Evil (talk) 22:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
- @Pure Evil: It indeed doesn't make someone inherently notable, but that doesn't mean there isn't a credible claim of significance to signifying that they could be notable (as the band is notable for Wikipedia, this is a significant enough claim to surpass the threshold of A4, so it can't apply. Therefore, the path for deletion is RfD. --IWI (talk) 04:54, 5 February 2023 (UTC)
- Firstly, I don't see the relevance of the "gay" comment exactly, but I do hope you aren't suggesting that this would be a negative thing. In any case, you may not have heard of them, but being a member of a notable band is a "credible claim of significance", meaning A4 cannot apply. It is important to remember that A4 is based on the enwiki equivalent, and does not actually refer to whether the subject is notable or not, but whether the article claims the person could be significant enough to have an article. --IWI (talk) 04:40, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- File:Symbol delete vote.svg Delete I can't find any reliable sources on the dude. The closest I got to one is this [1]. However, only spent a few minutes looking. Either this guy or another man of the same name is working as an agent now, I think. I say delete without prejudice. And the gayness is not relevant to notability in this case, seriously, why even mention it, PE? Darkfrog24 (talk) 06:20, 3 February 2023 (UTC)
- EDIT: I think I see what happened. The line break in my viewer at least pur it as "and is gay, so no" as if that were one idea when it's "...[insufficient claim 1], [insufficient claim 2], [insufficient claime 3 - "is gay"]" as one idea and "so no claim to notability" as the conclusion. That explains it. Darkfrog24 (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
This request is due to close on 16:31, 9 February 2023 (UTC), seven days after it was filed, although it may be closed earlier at the discretion of an administrator.
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not change it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No more changes should be made to this discussion.