Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Hartmann (USN)


 * 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   Deleted and userfied per author's request. Maybe it will be improved and reposted, then it can go through procedure again if needed. --Tone 07:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Hartmann (USN)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested prod, the reason was ''No notability established whatsoever. Just happened to be in charge of a unit when it received an aircraft.'' Procedural nomination, no opinion from my side. Tone 09:52, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:06, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.   -- • Gene93k (talk) 21:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Non-notable U.S. Navy commander who fails WP:MILMOS in every respect. References only mention him in passing. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:11, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. He is, quite likely, not acceptable per general notability criteria, but why did you invoke an in-project essay that is non-binding even for the project members? There are too many user groups with their local rules; don't expect non-members to follow them. NVO (talk) 21:43, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Essays like WP:OUTCOMES, WP:HAMMER, and WP:AIRCRASH may not be binding, but they can provide useful guidance about the subject matter at hand. • Gene93k (talk) 22:15, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * I didn't notice it was just an essay (though the criteria seem to be those used in military Afd's anyway). Clarityfiend (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Big ticket delivery but still fairly routine with primarily in-house interest. Without the unsubstantiated notability claim, this would be an A7 speedy. • Gene93k (talk) 22:21, 25 October 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete absolutely non-notable.--Nobunaga24 (talk) 04:36, 26 October 2008 (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.