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.
Michig (
talk) 08:36, 5 December 2016 (UTC)reply
This article is a mishmash. AFAICS it is a mixture of falsehoods and possibly-true snippets about a man who appears to fail
WP:BIO.
The references used do not mention this man, and some of the facts asserted in this article are demonstrably false. For example:
The article says "Bolton was also a Conservative politician and MP from 1931-1945 and 1950-1959". But no MP with the surname Bolton was elected at the general elections of
1931,
1931,
1935,
1951, or
1955.
The article says he was "a life peer from 1974 until his death in 1984". But the
List of life peerages (1958–79) includes nobody called Bolton.
If editors decide that there is something here worth, the article needs a rewrite and a new title. The BOLSA man was not called George and he was not a civil servant (just as he was neither an MP nor a Lord). --
BrownHairedGirl(talk) • (
contribs)
TNT ASAP - Please delete and I will recreate a proper article. This article was titled George Bolton (civil servant) but the article called him John Bolton, leading to confusion. There was definitely a notable Sir George Bolton (George Lewis French Bolton, no John) whose obituary I found in The Times in 1982 (not 1984). He was never made a life peer nor was he an MP but was KCMG. He was not a civil servant but a banker, so it won't even have the same title. I say TNT because I don't trust the motives of the person who wrote this article, as they have done nothing else on Wikipedia. They may have tried to slip it in as a hoax by making it a combination of multiple people.
—МандичкаYO 😜 07:15, 28 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Speedy delete. The fact that this article is its creator's only contribution is, in my experience, consistent with the evidence that this is a hoax.
Newyorkbrad (
talk) 00:00, 29 November 2016 (UTC)reply
Speedy delete. I don't have enough information to clearly determine whether this was a deliberate hoax or a
good faith error made by mistakenly conflating multiple people — but that's a moot point, because either way it's simply wrong. Bravo to Wikimandia for some nice work getting the right topic covered, but I think
WP:SNOW allows us to just kill the wrong one.
Bearcat (
talk) 15:43, 29 November 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.