Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alan Hamilton


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:07, 23 June 2009 (UTC)

Alan Hamilton

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

I know this has only just been created, but I am uncomfortable with an unsourced BLP about someone who has served in the military. I had a quick look for sources but couldn't find anything about this particular person (it's a popular names so searching is hard but "Alan Hamilton" comacchio didn't some up with anything ). I would have put this as a speedy but I don't think any apply. Quantpole (talk) 00:08, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no evidence of notability; can be recreated if a book is truly forthcoming and is eventually printed. JJL (talk) 00:19, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, no searches turned up anything useful. Only assertion of notability is a rumor of a book.  Until the book comes out and the information is verified the article does not belong.  A new name 2008 (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 01:17, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - does not meet WP:BIO or WP:RS. Cheers, Abraham (talk) 05:34, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No indications that WP:BIO is met, and I agree with the nominators BLP concerns - either this is a hoax or someone is naming a member of the British special forces, which is legally problematic Nick-D (talk) 10:28, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree with the arguments made above. The article has no references whatsoever, which violates the rules regarding biographies of living people. Also the article only vaguely points to the subject's notability, largely relying upon a book that may be published in the future. To me that seems like the article may be being used to promote the book. There are also the possibilities of a legal issue, as raised by Nick above. Therefore I think that the safest bet is to delete. — AustralianRupert (talk) 04:06, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This article reminds me very much of Alan Macwraith... Fail Deadly (talk) 06:53, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:BIO. Even the promise of an upcoming book falls under WP:CRYSTAL. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:15, 18 June 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.