Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Percy Jones

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was DELETE. jni 13:45, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

John Percy Jones
"Googling brings up little info". I infer from the article that he has written an article in a journal of labour history. Not notable. Radiant! 10:43, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC) This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
 * Delete. Can't really start an article from this, anyway. Anything would be a complete rewrite. – flamurai (t) 11:37, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable, confirmed by the article itself. Carrp | Talk 16:54, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Insufficient notability. Now if he had invented modern Fabianism ... HyperZonk 17:42, Feb 15, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, this is not an article, topic is not encyclopedic. Wyss 17:44, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as above.Brookie 18:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable - fails Google test, article as it stands is un-encyclopaedic. Megan1967 01:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)