Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jeffrey Waruch


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was merge to Edward L. Richmond (Pfc) then delete. Rob Church Talk 02:17, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

Jeffrey Waruch
This article concerns a witness in the court martial of Edward L. Richmond (Pfc). The text of the article and external links are similar to the Richmond article. The witness is not notable other than in the contextof the Richmond case, so perhaps this article could be merged  with Edward L. Richmond (Pfc), or, if not, deleted.Joaquin Murietta 15:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * keep -- In the interests of full disclosure -- I started the Jeffrey Waruch article. In the interests of full disclosure, User:Joaquin Murietta filed a copyright violation on another article, that I consider to be in bogus and in bad faith, and an attempt to game the wikipedia rules.  I called them on it in a comment filed just a few minutes before JM filed this {AfD}.  If JM believed in full disclosure they would have acknowledged this themselves.
 * Granted, the two articles contain common elements. But Waruch, IMO, merited an article when we learned he too was under inquiry.
 * JM suggests we should merge these articles when Waruch's inquiry is still in progress? The results of Waruch's inquiry will have nothing to do with Richmond. Remember, Wikipedia is not paper.  There is no downside to keeping the two articles distinct.
 * JM says in their explanation that the article should be merged, or if not deleted. So, why didn't they apply the {mergeto} tag instead of the {AfD} tag?  This is, in my opinion, a misuse of {AfD}.


 * Merge & Delete Waruch doesn't pass my criteria for notability.  In 5 years, will anyone remember who this guy is?  Merge anything that isn't already stated into the Edward L. Richmond (Pfc) article.--Isotope23 17:18, 14 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. The Richmond case is notable; this subject is not, and his role in the case should be basically a sentence in the Edward L. Richmond (Pfc) article.  MCB 22:18, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge - The information should be recorded somewhere, but would be best in th Edward L. Richmond (Pfc) article. The results of Waruch's own investigation may affect his own notability however. -- Cactus.man  &#9997;  08:39, 18 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.