Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dean Moon


 * 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 keep. (non-admin closure) Kraxler (talk) 16:19, 1 August 2015 (UTC)

Dean Moon

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Largely uncited claims ("today the terms are used on anything") and random supposed notable things - like fitting an engine into a car. Not to mention uncited peacock words about "historic", "internationally recognized", his level of showmanship, etc.

If anything, this article can be saved by being retrofitted into an article on the company, Mooneyes(?) (also written as Moon or MOONEYES), not Dean Moon. JesseRafe (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:37, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 19:30, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep I found some more references and did a bit of editorial work. I think that this person is notable, although some better sources should be available from car/hot rod-oriented magazines, which I don't have access to. However, a good article about him and his work shows in a BBC publication, and LA Times gave him a (short) obit. The article does need work. LaMona (talk) 00:24, 26 July 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep but the article does need work as LaMona pointed out. Sofiamar (talk) 00:03, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep. Admittedly this article was of poor quality and perhaps didn't demonstrate the notability of the subject, but other sources do demonstrate notability. All the article needs is some work. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 21:42, 28 July 2015 (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.