Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Carl Tatz

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 draftify‎. ✗plicit 23:29, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Carl Tatz

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

~~Draftify~~ ~~Delete~~ ~~Withdrawn, speedy keep~~ Draftify or delete, see below. Unsourced BLP from mainspace. Mass move of unreferenced articles to mainspace. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 20:07, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages, as specified above:

microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 20:11, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Businesspeople and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:42, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Appears to still be active [1] but no coverage in RS. This !vote is only for Tatz, I've not reviewed the others listed. Oaktree b (talk) 22:31, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Mack is also a !delete. Oaktree b (talk) 22:33, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment for closing admin: I'll declare that I've since recieved off wiki advice and would request that any unreviewed nom after 7 days be treated as an expired WP:BLPPROD. Thanks microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 22:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MicrobiologyMarcus,

I'm not sure that I understand your request. Since Oaktree b has commented, and other editors likely will too, I don't see how this AFD can be called "unreviewed". I also do not think you can convert an AFD nominated article to one that has been tagged with a BLPPROD. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 00:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Liz,

Yeah, I understand. My thoughts were that these were all good draftify candidates but because they had been moved out, were considered contested and thus had to go through the AfD process. My original thinking was that because these were all completely unsourced, they would make a good candidate for bundled draftify, could all be done at once and save editor time (no good deed...).

But then, after seeking advice off-wiki on the NPP discord, I was told that because these were BLP (I see now, all but one) they would've instead qualified for BLPPROD.^[a] And because BLP policy is one of, if not the most important things on the project, I thought that should supersede. I wasn't sure if guidance at BLPPROD said that I could place both an AfD tag and a BLPPROD tag at the same time. I'm also aware of the respective timelines for each: an expired prod should, in theory, be deleted after 7 days; whereas a AfD may not reach consensus after the first week and be relisted. This led me to my comment above, where I was hoping that should the closing admin see that if any individual page not receive any !keep votes and also not have any citations added to it after a week here (I've left two notes and a template on the authors' talk page) would it be possible to treat those pages as a BLPPROD failure and delete them.

I can see now that we're obviously headed straight to the scene of the accident so I'll now ask your advice. I'd be happy to withdraw and ask for a procedural speedy keep on this page, and then I will not bundle but individually tag all the above (less the one non-biography) as BLPPROD and start the process with those.

Let me know. Thanks, microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 16:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC) microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish·growths)} 16:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest to unbundle this AFD, keeping this one for Carl Tatz, and opening separate AFDs for others if relevant. This is headed to a WP:TRAINWRECK. MarioGom (talk) 09:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That being said, I think all of these articles need to be draftified. MarioGom (talk) 09:53, 8 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment MicrobiologyMarcus, despite your withdrawal of this nomination, this AFD can not be closed as Speedy Keep because at least one editor has advocated Deletion. If you think that these articles should be Draftified, you can specify that option in your statement. Perhaps other editors will agree. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Draftify all per WP:TRAINWRECK. This AfD should be procedurally closed ASAP because it's a nonsense to continue with it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:47, 12 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify all per above. No indication of meeting any notability guidelines, as all of them are unsourced. ARandomName123 (talk)^{Ping me!} 17:56, 14 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

^ Side note: that's fine, I'm not too proud to admit when something is a learning opportunity. Experience is the best teacher and for unique situations like this, I'll know how to address them in the future.

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.

[1] Side note: that's fine, I'm not too proud to admit when something is a learning opportunity. Experience is the best teacher and for unique situations like this, I'll know how to address them in the future.