Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Tudor


 * 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 delete. was speedied (G12) two days ago by Graeme Bartlett, so I'm just closing for sake of AfD archives Valley2 city ‽ 05:08, 14 June 2009 (UTC)

Doug Tudor

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

contested speedy, unsourced BLP created to assist in future political campaign. Considerable military career but nothing notable enough to warrant an article, especially in light of the coi and the political aims. Beach drifter (talk) 18:14, 7 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:18, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:53, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject could possibly be notable to the military history project if his many decorations were discussed in more detail (thus allowing the project to decide with all the information at hand), however, as it currently stands the article has no references whatsoever, no supporting materials, does not meet structural requirements, is an orphan, and reads like an advertisement. BLP guidelines are pretty clear on these issues. Currently it seems that the article is being used to promote the individual's political campaign, albeit by someone possibly not associated with him. I don't feel that this is a fair use of wikipedia. Given this, I feel the article should be deleted (maybe the writer can userfy it) and if the subject is elected, then it could be re-uploaded, provided it then meets BLP guidelines. — AustralianRupert (talk) 23:56, 8 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom Nick-D (talk) 01:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 03:38, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy G12, nominated as such, as it is a blatant copyvio. MLauba (talk) 12:52, 12 June 2009 (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.