Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eleven Reliable Men

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 of the debate was delete. Sango123 17:38, 7 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Eleven Reliable Men

This page is not suitable for Wikipedia (see WP:NOT) and this page is a sort of original research (including neologisms such as "Eleven Reliable Men") Questionfromjapan 02:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Keep, at least for now. Give more of a grace period for an editor to add sources if they can be found, after which I would support deletion. This article may be able to be salvaged. -Ultimus 02:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per nom. Nothing on Google, Google Scholar or Google Books or Factiva. The Japanese military during WWII is hardly an obscure topic. I would give some leeway due to the Japanese language factor EXCEPT that the Three Ravens article specifically says that the information is available (or even first uncovered!) in published English books - including one by the famous Edgar Snow. Bwithh 02:51, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and Bwitth. Paddles ^T_C 03:32, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and per comments made in the Three Ravens AFD. --Coredesat talk. o.o;; 06:03, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete internal spammed WP:NOR Ste4k 09:27, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. SM247^{My Talk} 10:31, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Unverifiable and quite possibly bogus. --Saintjust 10:39, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep Article is recently created and it has been acknowledged that information may be verifiable. It needs a lot of cleaning up but that is not a reason to delete. -- Alias Flood 16:54, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Information that "may not be verifiable" is absolutely a reason to delete. Fan1967 19:47, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Wikibout-Talk to me! 20:38, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete if not cited before end of AfD. Just zis Guy you know? 22:02, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as unverifiable. (As to the comment about a grace period to find sources... if an editor does not have reliable sources of the material in the first place, they should not be writing the article!) --MCB 02:43, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom--Celldea 06:18, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Zos 23:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above. Zos 23:08, 3 July 2006 (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.