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. If it will make the spa happier, we can call it snowball rather than speedy. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:02, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete zero implication of notability, csd was declined by a nonadmin without any reasoning.--Terrillja talk 19:24, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
delete. Seems to satisfy the criteria for speedy (db-bio), no claim to notability except for "legendary recruiting skills" (which means what? That he recruited hundreds, thousands?). --The very model of a minor general (talk) 19:47, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Non-notable. --Edcolins (talk) 19:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I believe the claim "Known for his legendary recruiting skills he is one of just a handful of Army recruiters who have successfully recruited in atleast three different states(Illinois,Texas,Indiana).", however unsourced that might be, disqualifies it as an A7, because it is an assertion of significance. The speedy decline was correct, in my opinion. Zipcode456 (talk) 20:35, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No assertion of notability. Also a comment: the editor who removed the speedy tag has now been indef-blocked for doing that to multiple articles. Since it was a brand new account that immediately plunged into this activity, it is probably a sock, although I don't know whose. Looie496 (talk) 21:18, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, there is something fishy there. Not enough for a RFCU though. First time I used the rollback all script, I knew it would come in handy some day.--Terrillja talk 21:23, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete - Per WP:A7 as non-notable individual...assuming he isn't a hoax. Cheers. I'mperator 23:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - A7 is for articles that don't assert any significance or importance about the subject. An article can not be speedy deleted under A7 if there is an assertion of significance, which in this case, there is. If a totally non-notable individual was the subject of an article which had a credible, though unsourced claim of significance, it still could not be speedy deleted under A7 no matter how non-notable the person is.Zipcode456 (talk) 23:50, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Because he recruited in 3 states? Maybe he recruited in 3 states because the Army needed more recruiters in a particular state at that time? It doesn't imply and sort of notability. From WP:N: "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article. " Recruiting in 3 states does not imply significant coverage. Or any coverage for that matter.--Terrillja talk 23:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
However, A7 isn't based on the WP:N guidelines. It's based on a claim of significance, not on the implying of significant coverage. The "one of a handful" and "legendary" part of the sentence is a claim of significance. Zipcode456 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 01:16, 13 April 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.