Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nathaniel Y. Walton

Nathaniel Y. Walton
Nathaniel Y. Walton was proposed for deletion. This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion. 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.

(sigh) I feel bad about this. Article is lengthy, detailed, and well-written, but appears to be autobiographical and despite this guy's numerous accomplishments, I don't think it is or could be encyclopedic. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker &#2470; (talk)]] 08:21, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

NOTE: User:134.181.37.132 (who briefly used the account User:Nywalton and then went back to the anon ip) has begun creating articles on his entire family - Alethea W. McCormick and David S. Walton may just be the beginning. I've also warned 134.181 that he will be blocked if he keeps removing vfd notices. Gamaliel 19:57, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)

NOTE: Redirects Alethea Meigs (Walton) McCormick, Nathaniel Young Walton and David Sellers Walton may have to be listed on WP:RFD depending on the outcome of the votes here. --MarkSweep 00:58, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)


 * Delete. Vanity page. Preppy American freshman who thinks an enormous amount of himself
 * Delete. Vanity page. --Gene s 08:25, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Resume-cruft. Gamaliel 08:27, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity, not notable. Muntfish 08:31, 2004 Dec 9 (UTC)
 * Keep. Definite accomplishments, notable events, well-written. Not typical vanity at all. Edwin 08:55, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC) Also thanks to GRider for his insightful and sincere mockery.  Edwin 06:43, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Sure, he's an accomplished kid, but are his accomplishments worthy of an encyclopedia article? Does every officer in a College Republicans chapter and every GOP intern deserve an encyclopedia article? Gamaliel 08:58, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Wow. Longest vanity article I've ever seen. Delete. - Vague | Rant 09:28, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: Unsure. I disagree that this is a well-written article. Any article (or stub) should in the first two paragraphs establish what is being described and why it's interesting enough to deserve an article. This doesn't even try to answer the second question until the last few sentences of a long article, and even then not very explicitly. So perhaps with a new introduction and general refactor it might be a keeper. I'm doubtful. Andrewa 09:46, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: What accomplishments?  He's the male equivalent of Tracy Flick from Election.  Every school has a kid like this.  He chose his parents well, and he got into college and wrote for the school paper.  Vanity of the usual sort.  Geogre 15:05, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: vanity. Tracy Flick is right.  The Boilerplate says Cleanup though ? --Tomheaton 16:32, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete: Vanity -- I'm in the U.S. Capitol almost every day and could snag five clones of this guy just by walking a few feet with my arms outstretched. Katefan0 16:48, Dec 9, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete as vanity unless Edwin can convince me what his "definate" noteworthy accomplishments are. [[User:GRider|GRider\talk]] 17:16, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Comment: I should note that the article appears to have been speedily deleted at 12/9 12:47 ("no useful content" was the reason given), then recreated at 13:14 by the original author. It was quickly marked for cleanup, then Katefan0 re-added the VFD notice (thanks). That's why you saw a cleanup notice, and that's why the comments here predate the first version in the history. The version I put the VFD notice on was significantly longer and more detailed, although written in the same style. I still believe the article is worthy of deletion, although I don't believe it was a candidate for speedy deletion. &mdash; [[User:Knowledge Seeker|Knowledge Seeker &#2470; (talk)]] 17:23, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. He could become notable later but simply being head of the College Republicans, even at a big college, is not encyclopedic notability. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:46, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable, probable auto-biography, vanity -- what's to like? --Calton 20:26, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Vanity... P Ingerson 00:39, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Assuming it's autobiography, he's welcome to put it on his user page. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:54, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. But just the same, I encourage the author to spend more time writing vanity articles and less time being a College Republican. Everyking 06:28, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. These vanity articles are getting out of hand. I guess we have this guy to blame for Bush winning? -R. fiend 07:53, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Just delete it. &mdash;[[en:RaD Man|RaD Man (talk)]] 08:11, 10 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Well written, but this person is not notable. Delete.  --L33tminion | (talk) 19:19, Dec 10, 2004 (UTC)
 * Del.Mikkalai 08:40, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)
 * Delete. Perhaps notable within his community, but nowhere near notable enough for an international encyclopedia. [[User:David_Johnson|David Johnson [ T|C ] ]] 13:04, 11 Dec 2004 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like other '/delete' pages is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion or on the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.