Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Bonney
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 of the debate was delete. Mailer Diablo 15:51, 9 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thomas Bonney[edit]
Wikipedia is not a memorial, nor a repository for genealogy studies. Eusebeus 17:50, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as it stands. Despite being fairly well-written, nothing in the article stands out as a reason for notability. If someone can find something to stand him apart from any other random soldier, I'd happily change my vote to keep. As it is, the article belongs more on a genealogy site than Wikipedia. GeeJo (t)⁄(c) • 20:07, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. Kuzaar 00:50, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. JoshuaZ 03:06, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment – the last paragraph, which is identical to Moreuil Wood (created by the same user), seems to be a copyvio from [1]. ×Meegs 03:34, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per nom. -- ReyBrujo 22:17, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. A soldier who died in a war where -- what? -- 50,000 men a week were killed. I'm sorry for his family's loss, but this article doesn't belong here. --Calton | Talk 03:04, 7 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. A shame, but who didn't lose a family member in that war? --Nydas 13:08, 7 May 2006 (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.