Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jerry Ray Hall

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. I'm unsure how "non-notable" can be considered an insult. Unless you've got a politician's ego, of course. yandman 13:34, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jerry Ray Hall

Non-notable mediator and unsuccessful political candidate. Fails WP:POLITICIAN. No WP:RS that his mediation efforts satisfy WP:NOTABILITY. Google search reveals an obit for a different Jerry Ray Hall, but nothing else that I can see, save his unsuccessful candidature. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. —Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I should like to add that the article creator's response has been to attempt to blank the Afd and then insult me and Wikipedia on my talk page. Not terribly reassuring from someone whose user name is User:Amediator. Remind me not to hire him. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 22:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable, no references for a biography. -- Mikeblas (talk) 22:52, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I can find nothing on the net about his work with Panama, apart from a Yahoo! groups thing I can't get into. I can find his unsuccessful candidature. I can find nothing in connection with mediation. There may be more in the name of his company, but I can't find this. With no references given in the article, I have to judge on what I can find, which is very little. Peridon (talk) 23:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Non-notable beyond a very narrow niche, and that's assuming any of that is actually true, since he gave no sources whatsoever. §FreeRangeFrog 05:27, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's funny that you would insult the subject by calling him a "non-notable mediator" and then get upset when the article creator insults you in return. Good for him, frankly. However the subject does seem to fail the relevant guidelines, so we still need to delete the article. RenegadeMonster (talk) 15:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right, good for him. Actually, I'd considered whether this article was written by Hall when nominating it for deletion and decided it wasn't: it seemed to be too poorly written for someone with his claimed academic background. Obviously, in retrospect, he did write it. I will be more careful in the future in how I describe articles when nominating for deletion, especially if I suspect they're vanity pieces. No point in adding insult to injury. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:52, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I thought mediators were supposed to mediate not insult. The author is 'Amediator', which says something to me about the whole subject. Peridon (talk) 20:15, 3 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. --Sc straker (talk) 22:23, 3 March 2009 (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.