Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elmer Thomas Hill


 * 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   delete. WP:SNOW  MBisanz  talk 00:41, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Elmer Thomas Hill

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

There's no evidence that the subject of this article meets the notability criteria set out at WP:BIO - no sources are provided and the only claim of notability is a statement on the article's talk page claiming that Mr Hill was friends with General Patton. The article's creator has stated that Mr Hill was his grandfather so WP:NOT may also apply. Nick-D (talk) 10:24, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  —Nick-D (talk) 10:24, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. No offense or disrespect intended to Hill or his descendants, but he fails to meet WP:BIO; two Purple Heart awards seems to be the only tenuous claim to notability, but I don't know how uncommon that is. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:14, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Also it's unreferenced, and I think the photos aren't of the subject but archive photos of the Normandy invasion. Ryan 4314   (talk) 12:34, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - not notable per Wikipedia's standards and lacks references. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:55, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've removed the material that was an uncredited copy from the U.S. 9th Infantry Division article (including the caption for an image that doesn't even appear in this article). What's left reads like a copyvio of a local newspaper's obituary and fails WP:BIO in any case. Deor (talk) 15:37, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Notability is not asserted, let alone shown. Edward321 (talk) 15:49, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:N  §hawn poo   05:59, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete; no reflection of course on Mr Hill himself, but two Purple Hearts in themselves are not enough to push this over the notability bar. WP:OR and WP:V are additional concerns. EyeSerene talk 12:43, 9 March 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.