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. Tone 19:12, 1 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

William Gheen[edit]

William Gheen (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

1. OTRS request for deletion from the subject.
2. The coverage he has is limited to quotes, soundbites and other bits and bobs when representing his organisation - not one bit illustrates his notability as an individual, nor is coverage enough to pass the "significant" requirement of WP:BIO Ironholds (talk) 18:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With the President position of an organization with 38,000 registered members and frequent use by the media for commentary on the immigration issue William Gheen easily meets notability guidelinesRichardBond (talk) 19:46, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Explain why. President of an organisation with 38,000 members = not a claim to notability. Take a read of WP:BIO, and then show how a million soundbites covers "significant". Find me one article with more than a paragraph (or even a paragraph) about him. Ironholds (talk) 20:04, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:16, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The subject appears frequently in news accounts to give a POV on political matters as president of a political action committee (which itself is barely notable), but I have not seen a single source that is about him. Since he has no notability outside of the PAC, there's no need for a standalone biography. There's no significant content to merge, but the title could be left as a redirect.   Will Beback  talk  21:13, 26 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. I don't believe that an article should be removed, censored, or edited based on an OTRS request from the subject, unless there is inaccurate or libelous information in the article. That said, I don't see that the individual is notable. While he may speak about or offer comments pertaining to notable individuals or events, I don't find that the subject himself is notable. Cindamuse (talk) 03:07, 27 August 2010 (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.