Wikiquote:Votes for deletion archive/Richard French


 * 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. — Jeffq 06:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Richard French
Not notable. ~ UDScott 21:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Vote closed. Result: delete (2 Deletes; no dissent). I have also deleted the redirect as mentioned below. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 06:04, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, unless evidence of notability is provided. I can't find much on this person online, including searching for the two works that are cited on the page. ~ UDScott 21:53, 2 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Concur with UDScott. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:32, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think I have discovered who this is — a fictitious person invented by an anonymous user for the Wikipedia article on Fifehead Neville, a real village in Dorset, according to the article's edit history. It's telling that another apparently ficitious person, James French, was added to the same article earlier by another anon, and someone (probably one of two "French" anons) registered as w:User:Jamesf. After an apparent conflict over which fiction to go with, a third anon IP (the same that created our "Richard French" article) restored the "James French" myth, then a new registered user cleaned out the drivel. Add to the Wikipedia saga the nonsense in our article about the derivation of "that's a Frenchie" (a well-known mild derogatory term for a French person, not a saying by this mythical creature) and the other silly phrases, and you've got a fairly obvious hoax. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
 * When we delete this, we should also remember to delete the Richard french redirect. ~ Jeff Q (talk) 02:55, 3 March 2006 (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.