Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shadow Defence Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare and Veterans


 * 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. Michig (talk) 16:47, 28 January 2012 (UTC)

Shadow Defence Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare and Veterans

 * – ( View AfD View log )

This article was written on the false premise that the subject post is a Shadow Cabinet post in the UK. It is not and never has been. There isn't even any evidence that Doyle actually has this portfolio or that Labour gives names to sub-Shadow Cabinet posts (other than a select few), let alone that they use the same nomenclature as the Government. The article is also unsourced and has few incoming links, with little prospect for more.

As it does nothing more than say the holder of the supposed office shadows a particular minister and list the current supposed holder, the article really serves no purpose. Rrius (talk) 06:09, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom - Doyle's website says: "Gemma is a Shadow Defence Minister, with specific responsibility for defence personnel, welfare and veterans." (my emphasis) The article title misrepresents the situation. --Northernhenge (talk) 17:06, 21 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:02, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 02:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Wikipedia gets dafter by the day. At this rate there will be articles on the Liberal Party's list of spokespeople for saving the flared trouser and open-toed sandal. --Mais oui! (talk) 07:01, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. We can have the debate on which shadow positions should have wiki articles another day, but this position is too vague for a meaningful article. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 09:48, 22 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not official /notable. RafikiSykes (talk) 17:51, 22 January 2012 (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.