Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Griffith

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE --Doc (?) 14:39, 22 September 2005 (UTC)

David Griffith
This might be a marginal case of deletion, but Google and Amazon.com tests don't seem to show much. Perhaps when the book mentioned in the article is released this would be notable enough, but for now, it might be deletion material. Paul 00:45, 27 August 2005 Paul 05:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC) ''Note: I didn't originally use this template but I put it in on 9-12. Also going to relist on the AFD log. '' Paul 05:21, 12 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I vote against deletion because I think that the ability to find obscure information on wikipedia is what makes it such a great tool, one that is truly different than encyclopedia britannica or another. Also, perhaps the book will be quite notable. [Anon user] 8 September 2005 (UTC)
 * delete: Anon, plez read Wikipedia_is_not_a_crystal_ball.---CH (talk) 02:48, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, nonnotable. --Angr/undefined 07:47, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as perCH . If there were a user page, I'd say Userfy until the book comes out and its notability is verifiable - since there's not, maybe the article creator would consider adding the (probably about-to-be-deleted) material again when the book does appear?  Dlyons493 09:59, 12 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Former content, 02:58, 22 December 2002 Maveric149, was a redirect to D. W. Griffith. However, AFAIK D. W. Griffith is never referred to as "David Griffith." Dpbsmith (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per CH. No evidence of notability presented. Adjunct professors do not meet the "professor test" (which IMHO sets the bar too low, anyway). Books are almost never notable before publication. Dpbsmith (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.