Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James H. Wear (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   delete.  → Call me  Hahc  21  21:29, 1 April 2014 (UTC)

James H. Wear
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

6 Years ago, this article was nominated for deletion at Articles for deletion/James H. Wear and kept. It is not clear to me what the supposed notability was or is though. He has notable family members (but notability is not inherited), and created some companies without clear claim to notability as well (neither has an article; Wear-Boogher gives 74 distinct Google hits, most from geneaology sites and the like; the other gives only 16 hits).

In my opinion, he clearly fails WP:BIO. Fram (talk) 10:28, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:31, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:31, 25 March 2014 (UTC)


 * delete The assertions in the first discussion for the notability of the businesses are reminiscent of the "oldest permanent floating crap game" in a certain musical, or Riggs Bank's sometime claim to be the "most important bank in the most important city in the world". Really, if this fellow weren't in the Bush, um, bush, nobody would care. Mangoe (talk) 11:55, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:00, 27 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete. Lacks reliable independent secondary sources to establish notability as required by WP:GNG and fails to state a reason why notability may be presumed in lieu of sources under WP:ANYBIO. Googling turned up nothing useful.  Previous AfD discussion does not appear to considered any guidelines-based arguments.  Msnicki (talk) 01:13, 27 March 2014 (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.