- 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 keep. per SK! & all that fun stuff ( non-admin closure) – Davey2010 Talk 04:56, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
- Tom Wallace ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Does not appear to meet either WP:GNG or WP:POLITICIAN. Onel5969 ( talk) 15:18, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- Withdrawn by nominator - As stated below, I misread the Politician guidelines. Sorry to have wasted your time. (thanks ScottDavis for the heads up). Onel5969 ( talk) 01:13, 17 March 2015 (UTC)
- Strong, obvious keep. Um, what? He clearly and obviously meets WP:POLITICIAN as a member of a state legislature. What a bizarre nomination. Frickeg ( talk) 19:36, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Frickeg ( talk) 20:08, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- Speedy keep per Frickeg. The sole reference confirms he was in the state legislature. What a waste of time. Clarityfiend ( talk) 21:37, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. NORTH AMERICA 1000 21:46, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- My apologies - I misread the
WP:POLITICIAN guideline. Yes, obviously, keep.
Onel5969 (
talk) 22:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- You can withdroaw the nomination for yourself - see WP:WDAFD. -- Scott Davis Talk 23:59, 16 March 2015 (UTC)
- 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.