Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Phillip W. Morrow

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. Sr13 00:02, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Phillip W. Morrow

Phillip W. Morrow (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

A self-proclaimed write in candidate for US president in 2008. Anybody can virtually run for president if they want, and this guy has no shot of winning at all. Most write in candidates don't have articles, and neither should this guy. Borjon22 00:57, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Delete Looking online, pretty much all I could find (other than Morrow's own site) was one blogger ridiculing Morrow's already-written inauguration speech. Out!!! Brianyoumans 01:09, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable nobody. Maybe worth a mention at 2008 United States third party presidential candidates, but there's nothing that can be used to write a full article. --- RockMFR 01:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete Seems non-notable, but other write in candidates have articles as well. Frank McEnulty is an article as well! My stance for now is delete though. 11kowrom 01:44, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, as there aren't really any sources to justify his own article. Somebody change my mind? --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 01:47, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Not quite notable enough or enough sources to write from. Gutworth 02:25, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge into 2008 United States third party presidential candidates as suggested by RockMFR. Horologium talk - contrib 03:32, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Someone who proclaims himself a write-in candidate more than a year before the election is saying that he isn't even going to try to get on the ballot, and thus isn't going to be running a serious campaign. --Metropolitan90 03:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete No sources. No coverage. No hope. No article. DarkAudit 04:11, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Billy227, Review my account!! talk contribs sndbx usbx 14:34, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. There is no sources of this information,Arnon Chaffin Got a message? 15:51, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, or else I will run my cat as a write-in candidate and post an article about him. Realkyhick 16:52, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
    • You're lucky I wasn't drinking at the time, otherwise I would've done a spit take on my monitor... which would then mean shorting out my computer... which would then mean I'd have to ask you to pay me for a new iBook. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 17:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete for lack of sources. And possible lack of brains on the subject's part. Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 17:27, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, unsourced. -- Phoenix2 (talk, review) 20:28, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, Pretty narcissistic if you ask me. He's unheard of, non-notable. Why not speedied? JodyB talk 21:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete: Exactly per RockMFR. ~ Magnus animuM ≈ √∞ 21:33, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per reasons above. Useight 01:11, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nomination. WATP  (talk) • (contribs) 01:54, 19 May 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.