Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Thomas Paget

:{{la|George Thomas Paget}} ([{{fullurl:George Thomas Paget|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/George Thomas Paget}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

WP:ONEEVENT; no independent notability. Appears to be largely WP:OR and WP:SYN. Possible merge with Bantam (military), if there's independently useful content here. Tagged since 9/07 w/o improvement. THF (talk) 13:13, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 14:31, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
• Comment: Why does this person have an article? He doesn't seem more notable than any of the other many under-age soldiers in WW1. He's not mentioned on any of the references, except 3 of them, which are simply namechecks on memorial/roll of honour sites. Ryan4314 (talk) 01:22, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. This is basically unsourced original research and doesn't meet WP:BIO. I suspect that this is someone's family history research. Nick-D (talk) 07:20, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

::Checking the creator's edit history certainly seems to indicate this. Ryan4314 (talk) 09:58, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

• Delete per nom. There were potentially hundreds of boy soldiers during the First World War, and this one doesn't appear notable enough to warrant an article. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 09:27, 22 January 2009 (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.