Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tulimalefoi Mauga


 * 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. postdlf (talk) 16:31, 26 July 2013 (UTC)

Tulimalefoi Mauga

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Not a notable person. Can't find a single reliable source for her other than that she is in the Air Force which doesn't mean she can have an article. Also there is no such thing as a "princess of American Samoa" since Samoans never had a Western form of monarchy or titles like princess, only many traditional chiefs; it is even wrong to call the Malietoas "kings". KAVEBEAR (talk) 02:15, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Oceania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:24, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:25, 13 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Single reference is no longer valid and their seems to be zero valid sources. As for the article itself, it is likely that the author picked the salient information from the military web site, where the nomenclature would be less than accurate, written to reflect the meaning, if not specifically and factually correct. scope_creep (talk) 23:18, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 02:46, 21 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Contains information which is not in strict conformity to the principle of Truth... DavidLeighEllis (talk) 19:56, 21 July 2013 (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.