Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bradford Jesus
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. Nja247 09:55, 1 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bradford Jesus[edit]
- Bradford Jesus (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Appears to be on the edge of notability, references seem pretty weak, fails people notability guidelines and being only notable for one event IMHO ~fl 02:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
comment I think the Cotteridge Growler [1] should have an article. :) He has a Facebook too, and a unique conversational style. Sticky Parkin 02:59, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Utterly fails to establish notability in any way, shape or form. Eddie.willers (talk) 03:40, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- Jmundo 02:56, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as local neologisms with questionable citing don't really meet the definition of notable. Bfigura (talk) 03:49, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Weak delete. Coverage too local and incidental to be worth an article. Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 08:38, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not every local character known for unusual garb needs an encyclopedia article. Fails WP:BIO. Edison (talk) 19:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:05, 26 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
from the author: yeah ok - I guess the fact that thousands of people from many generations know him doesn't make him "worthy of note". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.47.171.133 (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2009 (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.