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. - Mailer Diablo 12:18, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
This article is entirely unreferenced, and written in an unencyclopedic list format. John254 15:38, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete unless sources can be found. (Although the unencyclopedic style could probably be fixed with a rewrite.) Walton monarchist89 17:52, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Being unsourced is not criteria for deletion, I would say that more than half of articles are unsourced. J Milburn 17:58, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, but in this case the subject's notability is not verifiable per WP:V - there are claims that he's founded a number of organisations, but this isn't verified using reliable sources. Walton monarchist89 18:26, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. The use of all CAPS is off putting, links are to pages under construction. It needs to be wikified so badly, that they really should start from scratch. My Google search was inconclusive. MRoberts <> 19:02, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Disregarding the formatting, the subject doesn't appear to be particularly notable; the article reads like a resumé, not a biography. Zetawoof(ζ) 22:05, 28 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete this is a vanity page. Chris 22:24, 28 January 2007 (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.