- 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. — Scientizzle 21:09, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Richard Ireland
- Richard Ireland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Warrants speedy deletion as blatant advertising, necessitating fundamental rewrite to bring to Wikipedia standards. Article is essentially fan site and has no references. Subject is so obscure that dates of birth and death are not available. ScottyBerg (talk) 15:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. The article, as written, is pure advertising. There might be potential for a valid re-write. Ebikeguy (talk) 15:31, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom and above. I do agree with the issues seen on the article itself. みんな空の下 (トーク | I wanna chAngE!) 17:19, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Paranormal-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:49, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 01:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete with no prejudice toward recreation. Gigs (talk) 13:53, 18 October 2010 (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.