Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ben Levinson

Although it's a very laudable thing to have reached the age of 100, I would suggest that, in itself, it doesn't merit an article. Deb 18:33, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

• Delete: The article does not establish notability. If someone else does a Google search and finds out that this is more worthy than the general Willard Scott fare, then I can be persuaded. Currently nil. Geogre 18:58, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Reaching a hundred used to be a rarity, but I read a news report recently about how unremarkable it's becoming. Can't find that again, but statistically ... lessee, my home country, 9 million inhabitants, is the only place I know how to check those kinds of stats for. OK, twenty years ago there were 411 centenarians, ten years ago 695, today 1200. Agreed, I live in a fat self-satisfied little country that hasn't had any of that generation taken out by war, but still, centenarians are fast becoming less and less notable. Of course they're not all driving cars. Bishonen 21:40, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Delete. Living to 100 is not notable. Previous article about Ben Levinson, formula one driver (see article history), was nonsense and deserved to die speedily. -- Cyrius|✎ 23:48, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)
• Neutral - I put up the article on the centenarian to discourage a vandal I suspect was targetting a 'friend' going by that name. - TB 10:08, Aug 18, 2004 (UTC)
  • Thanks for that explanation, Topbanana. Do you think that the 5 day VfD period will be sufficient? If not, would a redirect to "Centenarians" discourage the vandal? Geogre 12:45, 18 Aug 2004 (UTC)
    • Happy to let the article sink or swim on its own potential now, ta. Delete/redirect/expand/replace per the concensus and (as ever) net of finding someone to do the necessary ;)
• Keep. I'd have no problem with an article on every centenarian, but this particular one is more notable than most. anthony (see warning) 21:24, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)