Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of Kwame Kilpatrick's political career


 * 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.  Sandstein  14:50, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Timeline of Kwame Kilpatrick's political career

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is a timeline that is based on a small number of sources, two of which were multiple citations to offsite copyright violations and the rest are 404. There is pretty much nothing here that is not well covered in Kwame Kilpatrick. Guy (Help!) 09:18, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 12:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. MT TrainDiscuss 12:14, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete for content is similar to that of the main page. I don't see the need for another article for Kwame Kilpatrick's career. Ernestchuajiasheng (talk) 13:34, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Merge with article on Kwame Kilpatrick. Vorbee (talk) 19:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I don't honestly think there is anything to merge, everything significant is covered in the main article already as far as I can see. Guy (Help!) 20:25, 8 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - As a content fork that doesn't even contribute any significant new content. Merging would not be useful or practical for the main article.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 20:48, 8 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete those of us who live or work in the city of Detroit know that one article on King Kwame is enough. Absolutely no reason to have a second article on this crook.John Pack Lambert (talk) 03:08, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete material here is already in the article, where it belongs, so no merge is necessary.E.M.Gregory (talk) 12:51, 11 December 2017 (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.