Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew Dickson (2nd nomination)
- 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. - Mailer Diablo 06:44, 16 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
AfDs for this article:
- Andrew Dickson (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Delete, this was no consensus 2 years ago, but we have matured our criteria like WP:BIO, which this subject fails, and this article has languished sans sources for these intervening two years demonstrating that not much notable is happening with him. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 06:28, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete I agree, by current standards subject is in no way notable. -Drdisque (talk) 08:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Strong delete. Unreferenced, clearly fails WP:BIO. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per the people above. With no sources, and the fact that the article has been untouched for 2 years, WP:BIO isn't being passed here. 1ForTheMoney (talk) 19:22, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oregon-related deletions. —Katr67 (talk) 22:35, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I'm curious what happened to the page history of this article. Katr67 (talk) 23:40, 13 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete — Unreferenced = does not meet WP:VERIFY; Notability not established. — ERcheck (talk) 04:17, 16 December 2007 (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.