Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian Lund
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. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:31, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Brian Lund[edit]
- Brian Lund (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Appears to fail WP:BIO. This was once a stub with a single source offering little to support the significance of the subject. The article is now a jumbled mess of unencyclopedic material. — MusikAnimal talk 18:30, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. No sources, rambling mess. Xxanthippe (talk) 02:22, 26 September 2013 (UTC).[reply]
- Delete. Unsourced and unencyclopedic personal reminiscence with no sources and no evidence of passing WP:GNG nor any other notability guideline. The WP:OWN behavior of its anonymous editor is also a problem. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:51, 26 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Completely agree with David Eppstein's assessment. Finnegas (talk) 15:45, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - More suited to facebook than an encyclopedia. -- Whpq (talk) 16:36, 30 September 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.