Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark E. Anderson (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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:17, 11 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Mark E. Anderson

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NBIO. There are roughly 200 major generals in the U.S. military at any given time, and the rank itself does not automatically confer WP:GNG. WP:NBIO requires SIGCOV in multiple, independent WP:RS (i.e., not connected to the U.S. military), which subject lacks. Coverage is primarily announcements, directory-style entries, or routine reporting connected to their official duties. All this falls squarely under WP:ROUTINE. Finally, while leading a WP:MILUNIT can sometimes be a path to notability, not every commander meets WP:GNG, as is the case here.

In the first nomination 10 years ago, a single comment asserting subject's notability under WP:NSOLDIER was enough to keep. This guidance, however, has since been depracated.

Longhornsg (talk) 21:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: People, Military, United States of America, and Wisconsin. Longhornsg (talk) 21:06, 4 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - although I'm thankful for his service, (1) a two star general is important, but it's not automatically notable, and (2) the sources are mostly from a museum website that is a primary source. I don't see significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources. Ping me if you find more. Bearian (talk) 02:53, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Nothing sufficient to satisfy WP:NBASIC. Dionysodorus (talk) 19:32, 6 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Fails WP:NBIO, not notable for a separate article. Kierzek (talk) 15:09, 8 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Not notable. Unremarkable career. Intothat darkness 15:52, 10 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Noting that I very strongly disagree with the deprecation of the previous guidance of NSOLDIER which presumed the notability of all flag officers, deprecated it was. With no prejudice for the recreation of this article at some point in the future when a clearer case for GNG can be made, I support delete. Chetsford (talk) 20:58, 10 September 2025 (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.