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.
If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to
assume good faith on the part of others and to
sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.
His only claim to fame is living a super long time. Everything barely worth saying fits in a paragraph. The rest of the prose about other people is better presented in a list.
Legacypac (
talk)
20:54, 11 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Delete/redirect to Europe list, there being nothing worthwhile in the article that can't be accommodated there (possibly with a minibio).
EEng (
talk)
21:22, 11 December 2015 (UTC)reply
WP:NOPAGE is just a guideline. Recent AfD discussions like
this one show that many editors believe that standalone articles about people notable for longevity can be perfectly acceptable, so there's no "clearly" about this. Please explain how the information in this article would be better presented elsewhere. --
Ollie231213 (
talk)
01:27, 12 December 2015 (UTC) This editor has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.reply
If he is so important surely he deserves a mini-bio on the Spanish page - yet you deleted that??? I've restored it because it is central to this discussion.
Legacypac (
talk)
01:35, 12 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep This article makes a clear and distinctive claim of notability. The claim is backed up by a broad range of reliable and verifiable source. The article is of ample size to provide the significant coverage appropriate for the topic. The article as it stands meets every possible aspect of the notability standard.
Alansohn (
talk)
03:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep. Really? the oldest person in the world, oldest Spanish man ever and seventh oldest man ever recorded isn't notable? I beg to differ. He died over 10 years ago so sourcing will be more difficult, but not a reason to delete this page.--
Uietueps (
talk)
04:57, 13 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Note In spite of my best efforts to show how Mr Riudavets can be well presented in the proposed target article Inception2010 insists on deleting anything about him
[1]. Here is a link to how I had it for this discussion and hopefully long term.
[2]Legacypac (
talk)
10:30, 15 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Obvious Keep One of the oldest men of all time, well sourced article and notable due to having been the oldest living man in the world at one time.
930310 (
talk)
16:58, 16 December 2015 (UTC) This editor has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.reply
How well sourced it is isn't the question -- it's whether there's anything worth saying about the subject that can't be as well or better presented in the appropriate list. As it is the article says almost nothing about the subject -- what in the sources to you see being added?
EEng (
talk)
20:37, 16 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Keep - One of the oldest men ever. sourced are great. User Legacypac should consider only placing Afd tags at articles that are truly in question of notability etc.. not only apply IDONTLIKEIT.--
BabbaQ (
talk)
22:55, 16 December 2015 (UTC)reply
Please focus on the case at hand not just vote against all my AfDs and attack me because you like excessive coverage of pageants. I'll take further such comments as disruptive behavior.
Legacypac (
talk)
23:10, 16 December 2015 (UTC)reply
If you consider that disruptive behaviour you should consider not sending me disruptive notifications of non existing personal attacks. A suggestion that is well based should be considered as such, a suggestion. Now to the matter at hand, EEng do not call my opinion irrelevant, it makes no sense and it is truly irrelevant as I do not even mention notability but the fact that he is oldest and the sources are great. --
BabbaQ (
talk)
23:21, 16 December 2015 (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.