Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James-J Walsh

: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. Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:26, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

=[[James-J Walsh]]=

:{{la|James-J Walsh}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/James-J_Walsh Stats])

:({{Find sources|James-J Walsh}})

Doesn't Meet Notability - some notable events but Wikipedia:NOTINHERITED. Appears to be Self-Authored. DavidTTTaylor (talk) 14:39, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

  • Delete. It seems that most of the sources are related to the group he is a part of, and not the subject himself. Ducknish (talk) 15:15, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete WP:NOTINHERITED, WP:CONFLICT — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.19.194.145 (talk) 16:00, 13 March 2013 (UTC)
  • Delete Not notable for WP:BIO currently. Soruces relate to org not person. 149.6.184.50 (talk) 16:49, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Cameron11598 (Converse) 16:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Cameron11598 (Converse) 16:58, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J04n(talk page) 13:56, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

Relist rationale: the creator of the page in question was never notified of this discussion. J04n(talk page) 13:57, 21 March 2013 (UTC)

  • Comment Apologies. In error I didn't extend that courtesy. My original nomination stands DavidTTTaylor (talk) 14:26, 21 March 2013 (UTC)
  • delete. Unfortunately the reason of vote #2 is wrong WP:NOTINHERITED is fundamentally flawed, however with regard to the events he's connected with, the connection is not strong enough and the events are not notable enough in themselves to mean that he would inherit notability by association with them (this is how the real world works). Barney the barney barney (talk) 18:49, 21 March 2013 (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.