Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bernando LaPallo

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 to Longevity claims. Courcelles (talk) 01:42, 5 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Bernando LaPallo

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

Non-notable individual. Simply being past 110 isn't enough for notability and none of the references to the book are reliable sources. This lazy local news segment giving the age claim and only reliable sources are the Daily Mail calling him a fraud and the New York name-drop from his daughter's bio. And before we bring out the World's Oldest People project crowd, the GRG puts it as incomplete or fraud here but that's authored by "L Stephen Coles, Self-Appointed Custodian for the Libraries of Civilization" so other than the AP, we barely have enough for an article calling him a notable pretender supercentarian. Ricky81682 (talk) 01:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Arizona-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. — JJMC89 (T·C) 02:08, 28 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe delete but mention elsewhere such as the list of supercenterians (or at least believed ones) as my searches such as this, this and this, there's not much aside from that and, considering, this has stayed since September 2010, you've expected more by now including news coverage. Pinging past editors Boleyn, Ollie231213, TheJJJunk (although it seems this one is not very active) and Robofish. SwisterTwister talk 07:30, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Longevity claims. This article looks like a WP:BLP1E to me; he doesn't seem to meet the criteria for an independent article at present. However, I'd say 'merge' rather than 'delete' as given the nature of the article, he could easily become independently notable if he lives long enough, and the article can then be restored. Robofish (talk) 20:47, 1 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Longevity claims per Robofish. Ca2james (talk) 18:24, 3 September 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.