Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eagle Bill (2nd nomination)


 * 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) Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 17:17, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

Eagle Bill
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Appears to be a longstanding stub, more than seven years with only two refs: one that leads nowhere (and looks as if it previously led to a non-WP:RS "source", archived here), and the other that leads—shock, surprise, etc.—to a defunct page on a commercial site, the front page of which appears to be the verbatim source for the text of the article. So not only does it flunk SOAP and PEOPLE, but also COPYVIO. Previous AFD discussion from 2006 looks like a pathetic joke; go see it and take note the article has not changed substantially since then. —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 01:58, 8 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:44, 8 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. I can't say I care enough to work on the article, but the subject appears to be somewhat notable among pot smokers: . Location (talk) 20:27, 11 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Our rules require subjects to be notable according to our standards. —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 02:46, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Given the lack of a pot-smokers subsection in WP:BIO, he appears to weakly pass WP:GNG. Location (talk) 03:18, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No canvassing, please. Location (talk) 03:29, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * No unwarranted scolding, please. I asked someone to take a look, and he did. Read the policy before poking someone with it. —Scheinwerfermann T&middot;C 04:26, 12 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 12:06, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Armbrust, B.Ed. Let's talk about my edits? 10:19, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep - Appears to just meet GNG, per:
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:48, 23 January 2012 (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.
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 08:48, 23 January 2012 (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.