Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian John Converse


 * 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 Speedy deleted by User:Tone. -- Longhair\talk 22:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Brian John Converse

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This non-notable article was speedily deleted, but the original author immediately brought it back to life. I am listing it here because the author apparently considers the deletion controversial. I find no reason for this person to be notable and no third-party references are cited. SaveThePoint (talk) 00:57, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * KEEP —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lebweb (talk • contribs) 01:20, 27 December 2007 (UTC)  — Lebweb (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Speedy Delete per Recreation of deleted material. Mh29255 (talk) 01:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Articles don't get speedied just because they were already speedied.-- brew crewer  (yada, yada) 01:36, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sounds like a real good person, but unfortunately not notable enough for Wikipedia. Delete. -- brew  crewer  (yada, yada) 01:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per Recreation of deleted material per Mh29255. How in the heck didn't this get speedied? Doc Strange (talk) 12:52, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete per above. I'm surprised myself; this unnotable subject should be a slam dunk for a speedy, and Lebweb is certainly courting blocking.    Ravenswing  15:34, 27 December 2007 (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.