Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/William Flynn (British Army soldier)


 * 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. Clear consensus for deletion. North America1000 23:46, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

William Flynn (British Army soldier)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I doubt if this poorly written article meets the notability guidelines. Looks more as a memorial then an encyclopedic article. The Banner talk 16:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

 Keep ; the reasons for deletion given by ‘The Banner’ for deletion are none specific, and based on opinion of the prose. The article is referenced and as well as possible true and unbiased. Even The Banner is unable to confirm if the article fails...

It is recording the life of someone who gave their life in the service of their country ( in this case adopted).

The gallantry award (DCM) itself is justification for notability - the medal is not one awarded for ‘turning up and not dying’ but requires notable sacrifice and dedication.

According to Wikipedia guidelines, this article clearly meets the requirements - It was created over 5 years ago without problem but suddenly fails because it was ‘poorly’ written.

PS - I am the original author — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisAckroyd (talk • contribs) 21:46, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Five years ago, it was rejected twice by the AfC-team for not having enough independent, reliable sources. Why it was moved to mainspace is a complete mystery to me. The Banner talk 07:52, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. There are no independent, reliable sources that I could find. The sources used in the article are all either primary sources that simply acknowledge his existence, by no means significant coverage. Clear fail of WP:GNG.  22:44, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 09:05, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 09:05, 5 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nomination could've been better reasoned, tough the article definitely is sub par in writing. A DCM is not sufficient to pass WP:SOLDIER's presumed notability, and nothing in the article indicates why the subject would be notable. Sourcing in the article is not sufficient to show GNG, and my BEFORE did yield much else in terms of usable sources.Icewhiz (talk) 12:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete, agree with Icewhiz, do not believe notability is sufficiently shown and the sources are sub-par. Kierzek (talk) 12:48, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails NOR. Sourcing, content, tone, and writing would need to be improved to make it an more encyclopedic article. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:21, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete. Holder of a single second-level gallantry decoration. Does not meet WP:SOLDIER or WP:GNG. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:13, 8 June 2018 (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.