Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Douglas R. Bush

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. Daniel (talk) 05:28, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Douglas R. Bush

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

This is a test case: I don't believe being the United States Assistant Secretary of the Army for Acquisition, Logistics, and Technology is enough to satisfy WP:BIO. Clarityfiend (talk) 14:48, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Bruce D. Jette is already an article, he was 6th ASA(ALT). DRB is the 7th ASA(ALT), the civilian counterpart of the Army's United States Army Acquisition Corps miltary chief. The ASA(ALT) is the Army Acquisition Executive (AAE). The existence of the AAE is legally required to acquire materiel; in other words, the AAE is needed to win. --Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 15:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Like I said, this is a test case. If successful, Jette and the other Assistant Secretaries are next for AfD. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:38, 12 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politicians, Military, and Washington, D.C.. Skynxnex (talk) 15:27, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Sources found are all to military websites; article here reads like a resume/CV, not seeing notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:36, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Military acquisition, like relevance and readiness, is a niche topic, which rarely reaches the mainstream often enough to warrant coverage there, unless it's Ukraine, etc.^[1]^{: 3:53-12:44}

The 6th ASA(ALT) (pronounced A-salt) knew his place in the process How the Army Runs (HTAR).^[2]^{: diagram on p.559} This ref^[1] shows that 7th ASA(ALT) also knows How the Army Runs (HTAR).^[2]^{: diagram on p.559}^[1] That says something about Army relevance, and about power projection (future readiness). --Ancheta Wis (talk | contribs) 00:58, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete not much in terms of independent, reliable coverage on the actual subject which is needed to establish notability. Best, GPL93 (talk) 18:24, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Ancheta Wis - wolf 12:02, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

^ ^a ^b ^c Center for Strategic and International Studies (23 Mar 2023) Pressing Challenges to U.S. Army Acquisition: A Conversation with Hon. Douglas R. Bush
^ ^a ^b United States Army War College and Army Force Management School (2019-2020) How the Army Runs HTAR: A senior leader reference handbook which synthesizes "existing and developing National, Defense, Joint, and Army systems, processes, and procedures currently practiced"

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:27, 18 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I am ultimately surprised at my own vote here. There simply is not enough independent, in-depth coverage of this incredibly accomplished person. Ultimately, I don't think GNG can be met here. In the future, I would just bundle nominations like this.--Mpen320 (talk) 03:34, 21 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Currently split between deleting and keeping...
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris ^talk! 07:38, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It might be more appropriate to delete it, since it needs to portray a more related source(s) to show its notability/independence... Ali Ahwazi (talk) 12:15, 26 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm not seeing the independent and significant coverage from reliable sources that would be needed per WP:GNG or WP:NBIO. The only ones that are even broadly independent are the two Breaking Defence stories, and of those ref #4 has no analytical content about the subject (the only things about him specifically are quotes, i.e. non-independent) while ref #2 is your run-of-the-mill "X was appointed as Y" announcement thing. Nor does there appear to be any more specific notability guideline that would be relevant. I'll also note that vague hand waving about how the AAE is needed to win, if anything, just demonstrates how there doesn't seem to be any policy-based argument for keeping this. -Ljleppan (talk) 08:32, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Update. I have nominated four of seven other officeholders for deletion (excepting two generals and a member of the National Academy of Engineering). Three are bundled together, while Bruce Jette has been nominated separately because he survived a 2018 Afd (the arguments there seem inadequate to me). Clarityfiend (talk) 15:39, 28 November 2023 (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.

[csisBush-1] Center for Strategic and International Studies (23 Mar 2023) Pressing Challenges to U.S. Army Acquisition: A Conversation with Hon. Douglas R. Bush

[htar-2] United States Army War College and Army Force Management School (2019-2020) How the Army Runs HTAR: A senior leader reference handbook which synthesizes "existing and developing National, Defense, Joint, and Army systems, processes, and procedures currently practiced"

[1]

[2]