Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert H. Tucker, Jr. (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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 00:39, 3 March 2018 (UTC)

Robert H. Tucker, Jr.
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This was a repost seven months after the previous AFD, but it appears to be substantially rewritten, if [http://speedydeletion.wikia.com/wiki/Robert_H._Tucker,_Jr. this Wikia deletion mirror] is an accurate snapshot. His civil rights activism makes him sound at least borderline notable, and there were more claims of achievements before the worst of the purple prose was ably cleared out by User:London Hall, but all unsourced, and I can't find any WP:RS online to verify any of it. This also seems to have been the case for the previous version. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:54, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Louisiana-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:55, 23 February 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. There are plausible notability claims here that could get him an article if he could actually be shown to clear WP:GNG for them — but there's nothing here that's "inherently" notable enough to entitle him to an article just because his name is present in one book that isn't about him in any non-trivial way. This is even less sourcing than the first version contained, and the first version still wasn't sourced well enough. Bearcat (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:GNG and WP:NBIO due to lack of evidence to prove clearance of those criteria. Kirbanzo (talk) 17:04, 23 February 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - Did some clean up to the article prior to nomination and was also considering nominating it for deletion based on lack of references. London Hall (talk) 15:13, 24 February 2018 (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.