Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mockelberg

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. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 14:35, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Mockelberg

[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)

Originally G14 CSD, but was disputed. This page does not meet the criteria for a DAB or a set index article. Servers no navigation function, only entries are nn fictional characters w/o articles. // Timothy :: talk 11:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. // Timothy :: talk 11:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Not disambiguating anything (though I assume you meant G14?). --IWI (talk) 11:48, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.This is a surname article, should keep it, because this page records the surname Mockelberg's information, the information is very important, if there is something wrong with this page, please modify it, thank you. --Lord Djibril (talk) 1:43, 26 January 2021 (UTC)
Delete to be a surname article, we would need actual reliable sources that actually discuss the surname. These are lacking. In fact, since both of the alleged uses involve fictional characters, I am less than convinced this is a real surname at all. There are very few fictional surnames worth having articles on, and to justify such as article they need a fictional back story, not just being dreamed into existence for one character. Now, this may be a real surname had by real people, but no evidence of that has been presented.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:55, 26 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No we do not. Per WP:Name pages, all that is needed for a valid {{surname}} page (an SIA) is links to two articles in enwiki about people with the same surname. There is no guideline which says they cannot be fictional. Narky Blert (talk) 19:01, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.This article is reliable already, although the page is records about some fictional characters, so shouldn't have the double-standard to judge the article. Maybe you think that the surname displayed on this page is unnecessary or too unpopular, but this surname is still used by some people and should not be deleted casually. I guess the reason why the author created this page is that everyone can recognize this surname. This article without any malicious intent. I agree and admire the author’s approach. In addition, this page has been updated, and the evidence for Mockelberg’s surname has been added, so it proves that this surname is a real surname. You can check it if you don’t believe it. In last, I urge everyone to help keep this page, thank you. --Everstonerelm (talk) 5:35, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Delete: I came here expecting to defend a surname article ... but neither of the persons listed is notable enough for a mention in the articles linked, and the reference is to a general genealogy site with no information on this name, so... delete. PamD 12:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Groht. PamD 12:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep.This article should be keep and defend, you say the reference was no information about the surname, just look carefully, you can find the surname's information. This website records the information of Mockelberg’s surname and the information of other people who have this surname, which fully proves that this surname exists in this world. Other websites also record the information of this surname. These evidences clearly exist. Carefully look up the information of this surname and you will understand what I said. Well, if I am not clear enough, please take a good look at this paragraph: The immigration list on the website clearly lists the names and personal data of immigrants with this surname, these are all evidence. In my opinion, this page does not have too many problems, so please do not make unnecessary attacks on this page. I admire the author’s efforts. Please keep this page, protect the information on this page, and save the page, thank you. --Stronehaster (Stronehaster) 2:43, 27 January 2021 (UTC)
Checkuser note: Lord Djibril, Everstonerelm, and Stronehaster are confirmed sockpuppets of each other. Please see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Lord Djibril. Mz7 (talk) 04:22, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Hmm, interesting. There are three "Keep" votes. The editor who created the article in question "Lord Djibril". Then "Everstonerelm", who has not edited since November 2019 but whose few edits include edits to Panzer, Jibril (disambiguation) and Djibril, and "Sronehaster" who has made just one previous edit, in 2018, to Panzer, which happens to have also been the second page edited by "Lord Djibril". Could just be a bunch of mates interested in tanks and in fictional surnames. PamD 15:05, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And "Werstone" has just !voted "Keep" at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Groht and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nelleis, having just one previous edit to ... guess what ... Panzer. Time for SPI I think. PamD 15:22, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is something refreshing, almost wholesome in the transparent innocence displayed in the above socking. // Timothy :: talk 18:07, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I'm not sure what sort of article this is supposed to be, but it doesn't really matter. If this is a DAB, it's G14 eligible. If it's a set index article, it fails WP:SIA. And if it's a standard article, it fails the GNG. In any event, it fails the relevant guideline and ought to be deleted. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - could not find any sources giving any actual info about this surname; it probably does exist as a variation of some other surname somewhere in the world but, unless it is actually documented in a reliable source somewhere, it shouldn't be kept. Alternatively, this page could be kept if it has a definite navigational purpose but it fails on that basis too. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:23, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Neither target mentions the name. I found non-WP:RS evidence for the name's existence in myheritage.com (a different link from the one in the article). None of the bearers looks in any way notable, and dewiki nowhere mentions the name. Narky Blert (talk) 08:00, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:GNG and WP:MILL. Not every name used in a fictional universe is notable. Bearian (talk) 18:39, 29 January 2021 (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.