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. — Aitias // discussion 00:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Emmett E. Miller[edit]

Emmett E. Miller (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Spammy-feeling article with absolutely no reliable secondary sources (advertisements don't count). Original research and unattributed quotes of praise, but there is nothing here that can sustain an assertion of notability. Originally PROD'd by User:DGG in 2007, contested by creator.

• Delete as nominator. //Blaxthos ( t / c ) 12:38, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as per nominator. Edward321 (talk) 15:19, 19 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 00:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

---

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:32, 24 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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.