Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Hinsdale

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. MelanieN (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

John Hinsdale[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm John Hinsdale (the subject of this page) and I don't feel I'm notable enough to have a living-person bio on Wikipedia hin 22:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 22:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Human3015^TALK 22:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: LOL.. I must say, I have never seen this situation pop up before. But, I did a cursory Google search to verify, and I agree with you, sir. I wonder how the article made it past New Pages and how it's been around so long. Just out of curiosity, do you know the original author? It's me...Sallicio!^{$\color {Red}\oplus$} 23:32, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 01:58, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete 2005!?! I weep WP:BLPREQUESTDELETE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dkriegls (talk • contribs) time, day month year (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:04, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Snow delete perhaps? As the article itself is not surprising considering it was 2005 and if it had been tagged, I would've found this quicker and tagged it for deletion sooner. Thus said, the current version is simply not enough convincingly enough notable. SwisterTwister talk 06:50, 3 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Well it's JohnHinsdale's lucky day! - I'm extremely surprised this article's been around for 10 years in the state it's in!, Well it's beyond fixing and as the bloke's not notable this is a case where BLPREQUEST should be actioned for once. –Davey2010^Talk 03:00, 8 December 2015 (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.