Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ethan Vaughan

This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was Delete. --Ryan Delaney ^talk 05:33, 21 September 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Ethan Vaughan

No google hits for "Ethan Vaughan", the only assertion of notability in the article is newspaper coverage (otherwise I would have tagged this as a speedy). Does not seem notable, unless there is info about this person not included in the article. Delete unless expanded with verifiable indications of notability. DES ^(talk) 17:35, 14 September 2005 (UTC)

• Keep Baltimore Sun thing's has got to mean something. Also, the law thing seems important, and his cousin is intriguing. Does she exist? Is she really a Conrad staffer? I'll look it up, but if most of it is true I'd say keep. History21
  • http://vocusgr.vocus.com/grconvert1/webpub/ahcal/ProfileLegislator.asp?LegislatorID=1279%7CS&XSL=ProfileLegislator&Menubar=Staff
  • Alright, his cousin is a Conrad staffer. History21
    • Not everyone who is mentioned in a newspaper article is noteworthy or should have a wikipedia article. The article does not indicate why the Sun coverd this person, assuminmg that to be true. Being a staunch critic of Bush is surely not notable in itself. Nor does having a cousin on a political staff mean a person is himself notable. DES ^(talk) 17:44, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
      • ^{Note: History21 has 25 edits as of this post, of which 17 are to AfD/VfDs. -- BD2412 talk 20:50, 14 September 2005 (UTC)}
  • History21 (talk · contribs) has had an ID since February, but in fact only has 5 edits to article space. User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:48, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete "Ethan Vaughan" + baltimore gets one non-related hit. At best he had an op-ed piece without his full name in it. No verifiable assertion of notability. --Icelight 18:27, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, smells strongly of personal flattery. Mr Bound 20:06, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, the article doesn't even try to allege notability. Is everybody who went to the same camp he went to supposed to get an article? User:Zoe|^(talk) 21:45, 14 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Being a second cousin of George W. Bush shouldn't even be enough to get someone an article -- much less being the second cousin of a senator's mailroom director. Nor is having a poem printed in a newspaper, nor is going to summer camp. --Metropolitan90 01:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
• I know I'm going to be alone here, but Keep Even state-wide recognition is notable enough for wikipedia. Any Marylanders out there? Yes? No? Maybe? nanaszczebrzeszyn
  • Sure, but does he really have "state-wide recognition" Pleanty of people have appeared once or a few times in a newspaper, but two weeks later nobody remembers them. If this guy is actually widely known in one US state, sure keep the articel, but i would link more than a satemetn that a poem of his was published in the Sun to show that he is at all widely known in maryland, or even Baltimore. My name has been published a few times in a regonal newspaper, my picture too, but i wouldn't claim that I was widely known. DES ^(talk) 20:12, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
  • User's third edit (first since March) and all to VfDs. User:Zoe|^(talk) 20:10, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Even if he is famous locally, it doesn't suffice to be considered notable. / Peter ^Isotalo 12:09, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:BIO, and no sources for any of the claims. Quale 03:07, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Definitely, as per above. Caerwine 09:11, 20 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.