Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lászlo Kovács

Lászlo Kovács was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was

Lászlo Kovács

This article is simply spam/advertising for a website. Really this should be a speedy, but articles like this don't come under speedy delete's remit (though they are proposed). Rje 16:19, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Delete: proposer. Wikiepedia is not a website database.Rje 16:19, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Now article has been stubifyed I change my vote to keep, my argument is not with the notability of Laszlo Kavacs. I apologise for wasting time, however when an anonymous user creates an article which consists solely of a link to an outside website I feel somewhat justified in my initial response.Rje 20:49, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Comment: The guy in the link seems to be the 'other' László Kovács. Kappa 17:22, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Yes, there do seem to be two of them, both notable, and there should be links between the two articles, assuming that the current article names are reasonable. And you're right, Rje, being an external link only is currently listed as a proposed grounds for speedy, see Wikipedia:Candidates for speedy deletion#Proposed cases#2. The fascinating thing is, it was previously considered as valid grounds for a speedy, at least by the sysops who criticised me for saving a link-only page (which I was then expanding into a proper stub) when I was a newbie. Food for thought? Andrewa 17:43, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Now stubified. I must question whether it's really constructive to list harmless and potentially useful articles like this on VfD mere minutes after their creation, especially when they are the work of a newbie who can't possibly know all the rules yet. As for speedying them, I think my views are obvious. Andrewa 18:11, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep. The spelling should be László Kovács for both people. Rename page to "László Kovács (cinematographer)" and disambiguate. UPi 18:00, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: Good suggestion on naming IMO. Perhaps keep the variant spelling as a redirect to the disambig? No change of vote. Andrewa 18:11, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep, notable, could use expansion. Wyss 18:52, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Keep and allow for organic growth. [[User:GRider|GRider\^talk]] 19:00, 15 Dec 2004 (UTC)

• Keep: I think the cinematographer is more famous, but I'm more cineaste than wonk. (As for the validity of an external link only page being speedy deleted, I'm all for it. A coherent and valuable new user can establish what's going on, but, given the amount of outright spam and page rank boosting that goes on, I think we should trust admin judgment there, as we already do with other things, to tell the good from the bad.) Geogre 05:00, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
  • Comment: Agree that the cinematographer is probably the more notable. Easily fixed. Disagree about coherent and valuable new user, my guess is that we lost one here. Check the times on the article history. If the original contributor tried to expand it, they probably received an edit conflict owing to the addition of the VfD notice. All in all an appallingly inhospitable welcome. No change of vote. Andrewa 18:11, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
• Absolutely keep the article on the filmmaker. He's famous enough to namechecked on Dawson's Creek, for pete's sake. PedanticallySpeaking 18:12, Dec 21, 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.