Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Oliver Doswell, II

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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; I'm also going to salt the article because of the repeated recreation. It may be possible to write an article without the promotional tone and the WP:BLP concerns; but at this point this will have to be done in userspace first. — Coren (talk) 00:00, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] David Oliver Doswell, II

David Oliver Doswell, II (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Article has been speedily deleted for lack of notability, recreated under a different name, deleted again, recreated again, and copied to this User Talk Page. Seems to be the purpose of multiple SPAs. At least part of it is copied from this page. All in all, quite a mess. I think we need a consensus on notability. CitiCat ♫ 04:44, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep: For now. Agree with the nom, it is a mess. I've added a couple tags. Asserts notability as "award winning", doesn't specify what award. Mentions at least one good mention, in the New York Times. Needs lots of work, and was just recreated yesterday. I'm willing to wait on deleting this one. - Rjd0060 05:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete an essayist, with a few columns in newspapers and some books with mention in local papers. Perhaps if this is trimmed radically it might be [possible to see just what is important. I don;t think I've ever before said to delete an article as a unfixable mess, but this might be the occasion.DGG (talk) 04:17, 17 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and salt - He won a redlinked award, in its first year, and is a friend of the owner of the redlinked group (which sounds like an advertising firm) that bestows the award. Delete and salt to prevent constant recreation of deleted content. AvruchTalk 00:25, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 14:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment - this asserts notability, but WP:BLP requires good cites for every assertion. Can this be rescued? Bearian'sBooties (talk) 01:26, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • uncertain Outrageously spammy article, but does seem to show some notability. Uncertain whether it would not be betterto start over. DGG (talk) 04:31, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete appears to be borderline on WP:BLP, and I'm not sure that it can be salvaged. :-) Stwalkerster talk 14:26, 29 November 2007 (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.