Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Burns Upton


 * 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 per consensus. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 20:38, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Charles Burns Upton

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject of this article requested that it be deleted via OTRS. I'm aware of the disruption going on related to this article, but it does seem that Upton does not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies, as there is a lack of reliable, independent sources that talk about Upton in depth. Howicus (Did I mess up?) 02:36, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  SwisterTwister   talk  05:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete as this simply lists his own information and nothing at all for any applicable notability even basic. SwisterTwister   talk  05:17, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete: ... and possibly salt give the interesting | page history. Subject does not meet WP:GNG or WP:ANYBIO, and neither his appointments nor his roles in the cited cases appear to confer notability. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 08:30, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Law-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:31, 15 April 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete. I don't see any indication of notability, and would support deleting on that basis alone. The fact that the subject of the article has requested that it be deleted, while not in and of itself compelling deletion, is the icing on the cake. Delete. TJRC (talk) 23:22, 15 April 2016 (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.