- 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. Rjd0060 (talk) 22:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Gerry Brundage (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
None of the claims to importance on the page usually lead to the kind of significant coverage by reliable sources required for a subject to meet the primary notability guideline or the specific guideline for people. I can find no evidence that this person is an exception. Guest9999 (talk) 18:47, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete CSD A7 - notability not asserted. -- Roleplayer (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I see no real claim to notability, let alone references to prove it.--Michig (talk) 19:00, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete – Sorry – could find no references other than Wikipedia. However, kudos to the young man! He has certainly accomplished more in his 17 years, than most people in an entire lifetime. ShoesssS Talk 19:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. NN Dreamspy (talk) 20:15, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 20:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy delete WP:CSD#A7, no significant assertion of notability. I'd tag it for that but the nominator already removed an a7 tag. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:04, 31 March 2008 (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.