Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Theodore Pappalardo


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 10:41, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

Robert Theodore Pappalardo
No assertion of notability, just of high affiliation. Djcartwright 05:47, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Abstain. I've just restored it per the user's request with the caveat that it would probably not survive long. - Lucky 6.9 07:57, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I'm working on it, hopefully adding significant info that will make it notable enough for retention. Toniskids 09:10, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 11:39, 1 October 2006 (UTC)

What does that DumbBOT "imcomplete/listed" post mean? (Yes, I'm a newbie, I'm sorry.) Does that mean the article is still marked for deletion? I've added further facts and citations. Is there anything else I can/should do, or will the article be deleted in X number of days regardless?

Thanks .... Toniskids 16:30, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Toniskids: It's a procedural thing; articles nominated for deletion need to be listed on a couple pages, and the nominator forgot one or more of those steps. Zetawoof(&zeta;) 21:56, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Didn't "forget" anything. It was speedy-deleted in mid-process, and then restored later.  I didn't bother to finish trying to delete an article that didn't exist anymore; wasn't counting on the possibility that it be restored later.  Djcartwright 01:39, 2 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete Too long to be a stub, but still nothing demonstrating notability. The Photon 01:19, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, even in view of the additions since it was nominated, it still reads like a magazine article instead of an encyclopedia article, and doesn't explain why R. T. Pappalardo is notable in and of himself. Djcartwright 01:43, 2 October 2006 (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.