Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ron Delezio

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 merge and redirect to Sophie Delezio ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 23:34, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Ron Delezio

Ron Delezio (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) - (View log)

This is an article and unverified article about a living individual with no notability beyond having a disabled daughter and campaigning for her cause. My merge was questioned by another editor so I am bringing it here. --Peta 00:23, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Even if the claim that he was named father of the year was sourced, that alone would not meet WP:BIO. Likewise, being on the periphery of someone more famous does not allowing piggybacking onto that fame, even if the daughter has been the subject of multiple, not-trivial treatment in reliable sources.--Fuhghettaboutit 00:32, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment Fug's comments illustrate how deletionists operate. The suggestion that the FoTY award was a figment of someone's imagination is clearly made in bad faith. Fug could have done a quick SE search and amended the article (if it needed to be) - rather he uses this transparent device to attempt to sway casual observers that the article has no merit. Albatross2147 00:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Even if his daughter, with whom we sympathise, were notable, that would not make him so. If he were a major fundraiser for important charities that might carry some weight, but there is no indication that this is so.--Anthony.bradbury 00:37, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Will you please explain how you have come to believe that the daughter is not notable as well. Both father and daughter meet WP:BIO As a deletionist you should think about recusing yourself from these "votes" and restrict yourself to comments. Albatross2147 00:27, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 00:40, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. There are two sources for his Australian Father of the Year award. These reference are from Australian news media, both of which are reliable sources. He is honoured (and notable) as a significant fundraiser for the Day of Difference Foundation, not because of who his daughter is. --TruthbringerToronto (Talk | contribs) 01:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Sophie Delezio. These awards are not really sufficient notability in themselves, but there's no reason they can't be mentioned as part of his daughter's article. --Dhartung | Talk 01:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Sophie Delezio. The daughter is notable and so are the awards, however the breif bio. of the Mr. Delezio is not notable enough to have it's own article. I do think it fits in just fine with the daughter's though.Ganfon 01:30, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Sophie Delezio. John Vandenberg 03:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Sophie Delezio - If he does enough speaking he may become notable in the future. Reference needs to be moved to Australian Father of the Year award.Garrie 05:07, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Very Strong Keep - Delezio is notable in NSW and Australia. As pointed out he is a significant fundraiser and advocate for disabled people. This is a bad faith and petulant nom by the deletionist nominator who didn't like being challeged vide his/her statement in my talk when challenged on the earlier peremptory deletion I am an editor; I can make decisions. I don't need permission.. This idiotic statement should be enough to rule out the AfD nomination although the article does need expansion. One reason it has not been expanded is that as the article relates to a living person who lives a largely private life but does some notable things (albeit in an Australian context). Albatross2147 08:08, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Sophie Delezio, being 'newsworthy' is not to be encyclopaedic. This information would be much better served in Sophie's article. If the merge fails, delete -- Greaser 08:22, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete DXRAW 09:59, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Sophie Delezio. On its own, this article does not make notability requirements. His deeds are known quite publicly to Australians. As said by Greaser if the merge fails, then delete. --Ali K 10:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Unclear why the father or the daughter are encyclopedically notable. Bwithh 10:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per TruthbringerToronto. Due to his fundraising and other actions, he's gotten wide press attention in his own right beyond simply being the father of a disabled daughter. The two Australian awards, now sourced, help establish that. -SpuriousQ 11:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. Notable in Australia. Notability now verified by reliable sources. --Charlene 13:42, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep well sourced, encyclopaedic biography article that passes WP:BIO - why are we even discussing this? WilyD 15:09, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment As stated elsehere this is a bad faith nom by a petulant admin. I reiterate the example of their "I don't like it I am gunna delete it" attitude: I am an editor; I can make decisions. I don't need permission. Albatross2147 23:46, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - meets WP:BIO with reliabble sources provided for verification. -- Whpq 18:58, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Sophie Delezio. In so far as he may be notable, it is as Sophie's father, not in his own right. Coemgenus 20:18, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Given that he meets a WP:BIO criterion for being notable in his own right, care to elaborate? WilyD 21:31, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. The text in the article regarding Day of Difference Foundation is incorrect due to omissions. He actually created the charity after his daughters accident, and is the chairman. [1] While I applaud the man for his efforts, the charity is only notable due to his daughter's plight. Also, the father of the year award is not reason for notability in itself; the award is primarily about raising funds for charity. John Vandenberg 22:45, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - Jayvdb's comment is. frankly, rubbish. The Father of the Year award is a fund raising vehicle BUT if you look at the list of the recipients you will find that almost all of them have articles in Wp or ought to because of their prominence in Australian history. That is to say the award is taken seriously by the award committee, the recipients and the Australian public perhaps even more than the Australian of the Year award which has been somewhat devalued by the continual awards to nondescript sports people. Albatross2147 00:00, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • And Lee Harvey Oswald is only notable for shooting JFK - yet he gets his own article. WilyD 07:19, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
And all those rooly rooly notable fat-arse "M"LB baseball players from the sixties. Albatross2147 03:11, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep I was leaning to merge, however the key point for me is that he has become (where originally he was not) notable in his own right - eg [2] judge for Take 5 Magazine's 'Young Brave Hearts awards'; [3] Australian Festival of Light Citizenship Award yadda yadda yadda - over 2,000 hits on Google. Springnuts 23:38, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment Subject was nominated for Australian of the Year, but does not appear on what seems to be the list of finalists. I'm not sure whether merge or keep would be better; outright deletion would be wrong. Eludium-q36 10:23, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as 2006 Australian Father of the Year. I would not vote keep as father of Sophie Delezio (probably wouldn't even vote keep on her). --Scott Davis Talk 10:33, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep, "Father of the Year" seems like a pretty marginal award, and I don't think it makes him very notable, but I think it makes him notable enough to pass, and the article has that all-important feature: sources! Meets WP:V, WP:RS, and WP:BIO, even if it's just barely on that last. (And no, I don't think he's only known because of his daughter--it actually looks like it's the other way around. I would probably vote to delete an article on her.) Xtifr tälk 12:51, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Springnuts. It's true that he was originally notable only because of his daughter, but since then, he's established enough of a public presence to become notable in his own right. Quack 688 13:07, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge and redirect to Sophie Delezio. Father's notability only via his daughter. Eusebeus 20:44, 14 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Mergeto/from Sophie Delezio. All the father's actions and notability are a direct result of Sophie's accidents, and so the two are inextricably linked, as they do not have independent notability. Ohconfucius 02:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Clearly satisfies WP:BIO. The previous two comments also accept that the subject is notable, so I wonder if they meant keep. Or should we merge George Washington into United States for the same reason? CiaranG 13:50, 15 January 2007 (UTC)
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.