Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sir Dan Thomas

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 speedy delete. St Anselm (talk) 10:41, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sir Dan Thomas[edit]

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

Does not seem to be notable enough. Also, creator may have coi. See username. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 04:51, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. czar · · 04:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. czar · · 04:55, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, borderline speedy - fails WP:GNG. St Anselm (talk) 05:42, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete, meets WP:CSD#A7, no relevant sources anywhere - pretty much fails WP:GNG. hmssolent\^{You rang?} _{ship's log} 06:23, 26 April 2013 (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.