Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Richard Mudd


 * 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   redirect. If there is anything worth merging it can be pulled from the page history.Beeblebrox (talk) 16:30, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Richard Mudd

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete or Merge (as nominator) into Samuel Mudd per Notability and already exists in another article. Only reference I can find refer to his death and/or his fight to clear his g pap's name. Information already exists in the Samuel Mudd article making this unneeded. Pudge MclameO (talk) 08:35, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 11:37, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Washington, D.C.-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:56, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  —&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 21:57, 31 August 2011 (UTC)

delete &mdash; there seems to be nothing notable about this fellow that's not tied into his crusade re: grandpa, and that is already covered better in the Samuel Mudd article than it is here, thus obviating need to merge. it's possible that the case he filed, mudd v. white, deserves an article, but this isn't it, and won't become it. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 22:06, 31 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect If most of the content that is in this article exists in another, then to aid navigation and because redirects are cheap, I think it would be more appropriate to redirect as opposed to delete. Steven Zhang  The clock is ticking....  02:16, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * redirect per Steven Zhang. it didn't even occur to me, but it's the obvious thing to do. &mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 03:39, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Works for me either way. We just don't need a stand alone article.  Pudge MclameO (talk) 05:13, 8 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Samuel Mudd. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 14:29, 8 September 2011 (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.