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 deleted by User:Peridon, CSD G12. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 22:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

John Dickinson (Write In) (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)

Subject does not appear to meet the WP:GNG or WP:BIO notability guidelines. The references in the article do not establish notability, and searching doesn't turn up anything relevant. Article is written like a campaign webpage, and even if notability could be satisfied, the article would need a fundamental rewrite to turn it into an encyclopedic article, little of anything there can be salvaged. Borderline WP:CSD G11 territory. Monty₈₄₅ 19:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Subject fails WP:SIGCOV.--Ben Ben (talk) 19:54, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• I've tagged this for speedy, it's straight up spam. Hairhorn (talk) 20:16, 7 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy delete. In part apparent copyright violation as well. 99.149.85.40 (talk) 20:22, 7 September 2012 (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.