Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dayton datlowe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by (aeropagitica) (talk | contribs) at 21:04, 18 December 2006 (→[[Dayton datlowe]]: delete.). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 21:04, 18 December 2006 by (aeropagitica) (talk | contribs) (→[[Dayton datlowe]]: delete.)
- 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 Deleted as a non-notable biography, WP:BIO refers. (aeropagitica) 21:04, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This biography does not appear to meet notability standards and a large section at the end of the article, Relations, is mainly not biographical. If not deleted, it should at least be cleaned up and moved to a properly capitalized name. Regards, Nick—Contact/Contribs 15:18, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Already moved to Dayton Datlowe without prejudice. B.Wind 21:51, 14 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Aside from the obvious problems, this unreferenced article does not satisfy WP:N and does not meet Wikipedia:Notability (people) in my opinion. ccscott 17:41, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Agreed. It has no significance save to the person who wrote it. -- Kerowren 18:55, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not enough information to establish notability. SteveHopson 21:20, 13 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- The first two references establish WP:PROF directly (the third is an index to a journal that apparently has an article with Datlow as co-author); so he seems to merit a Wikipedia article if it is properly written. Unfortunately, this barely says anything at all besides the references. Close call: Stubify and keep. If the stub is unchanged in, say, three months, it should be deleted as WP:PROF establishes necessary, but not necessarily sufficient, conditions for keeping articles on faculty. B.Wind 21:58, 14 December 2006 (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.