Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/That Guy (USMC)

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. MBisanz ^talk 04:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)

That Guy (USMC)

That Guy (USMC) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Even if the content is correct, the subject does not merit an article. --Zundark (talk) 08:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

• Strong Delete Per WP:DICDEF.

  Judicatus | Talk | Contributions

  08:49, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
• Delete, weakly, in its current state. The brief content ("That guy" was a term coined by the USMC for drill instructors to use. Used as a correspondence term, it is how drill instructors address one another and other recruits.) is rather confusing. If there was some kind of official directive requiring USMC drill instructors to confine themselves to "that guy" rather than more colorful language, this might be notable and verifiable, so any deletion should be without prejudice. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:03, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:DICDEF and WP:N Nick-D (talk) 23:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. —Nick-D (talk) 23:32, 3 April 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per all above. Drmies (talk) 00:06, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:N and WP:DICDEF. I'm not sure this article is long enough to merit a stub either... Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 06:32, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
• Delete: Unverified DICDEF. Ryan4314 (talk) 01:34, 8 April 2009 (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.