Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James E. Sabow (3rd 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   delete. Mark Arsten (talk) 16:03, 19 August 2012 (UTC)

James E. Sabow
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

I do not think there is enough evidence here to show notability. Not news any longer in the usual sense, exactly, but still old news of little significance.  DGG ( talk ) 21:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 00:56, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * • Gene93k (talk) 00:57, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The lack of independent, verifiable secondary sources being the reason it doesn't pass WP:GNG. Not notable enough to clear the hurtle.Jimsteele9999 (talk) 01:46, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Buckshot06 (talk) 03:41, 11 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep it What references do you need to verify you have Congressional Hearings and LA TIMES, and if you found that the article is not neutrally written then why not modify it INSTEAD OF DELETING IT this guy was a colonel and awaiting chief of staff and his wife and brother say he was murdered by the army and you still say this is irrelevant? Vjiced (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Colonels are not considered automatically notable. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, although there was initial significant coverage of the death, enough to pass WP:GNG, because the subject was notable for one event WP:1E applies as does WP:EVENT. That being said, I don't believe that the subject passes WP:SOLDIER or the death of the subject passes WP:EFFECT. The death is a tragedy, however the subject and the event does not appear to pass notability to warrant inclusion in WikiPedia.--RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 00:23, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment we have some very notable allegations of illegal importing of drugs via El Toro etc, and misuse of military aircraft, mentioned in the references. The solution might be to create an article on Brigadier General Wayne T. Adams, who was fired for misuse of military aircraft for personal use, and add the material there. Vjiced, colonels are one rank lower than we automatically consider notable. Brig. Gen. Adams meets the rank cut-off, and was involved with the Sabow case. Buckshot06 (talk) 02:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
 * The allegations are just that - allegations - and as such should not be included in Wikipedia. The only charge against Col. Sabow was using military aircraft for personal golfing trips. If someone wants to create an article about General Adams they certainly could, but it would have nothing to do with this discussion. A redirect would be inappropriate, because little or nothing about Col. Sabow would belong in that article. BTW I don't find anything saying that Gen. Adams was fired; he was reassigned. --MelanieN (talk) 17:04, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete The officer was not notable before his unfortunate death, and has not become enduringly so as a result of his death. This article seems to exist only to promote the allegations of foul play by his family. The article has been deleted twice before so perhaps it should be salted as well as deleted. --MelanieN (talk) 01:55, 17 August 2012 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 06:03, 17 August 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete - fails WP:1E. Anotherclown (talk) 06:23, 18 August 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.