Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Moss


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. -Splash talk 21:58, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Daniel Moss
Former official of minor party - who cares? Sceptic 17:24, 5 January 2006 (UTC)


 * delete Not worth mentioning 213.86.122.122 17:40, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * These pages are being added by a couple of characters (not the subjects of the pages as it happens - see also Michael Harvey) who are obsessed with Veritas and keep adding spurious links to their own sites. Wikipedia entries for other parties do not detail party officials, nor do they list individual parliamentary candidates - this information can be accessed via the Constituency page Rushcliffe (UK Parliament constituency) if anyone wants it. Sceptic 17:55, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Has appeared in The Guardian, The Times  , The Financial Times , and on The BBC news website . Not Totally non-notable then... Keep Jcuk 18:37, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That description of those hyperlinks is completely misleading. None of them are actually articles about this person, that would satisfy the WP:BIO criteria, at all.  They are all election result pages.  We already have coverage of this person that is exactly equivalent to those in Rushcliffe (UK Parliament constituency), as pointed out above. Uncle G 18:46, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * That description is "Has appeared in the following newspapers." How on earth is that misleading?! Jcuk 20:42, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * We can all read the second sentence that you wrote, you know. It's right there.  &#9786; Uncle G 23:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Merge with Veritas (party). Not notable on his own, but the party is known. Dan 23:06, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  23:10, 5 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Also totally unverifiable. Morwen - Talk 14:02, 9 January 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete for reasons above. PJM 14:08, 9 January 2006 (UTC)

Duplicate vote

 * delete This is of no interest to anyone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.86.122.122 (talk • contribs)


 * 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.