From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 merge to USS Bebas. Consensus is that the subject does not meet the relevant notability guidelines, but the article content would improve the namesake ship's page. What content to merge is left to editor discretion. Even the keep !votes agree that one of the primary claims to notability is getting a ship named after him. The keep !votes are generic and do not address the content/sourcing of the article in question. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 14:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Gus George Bebas

Gus George Bebas (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG as a one-time recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross (United States). Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
This is a procedural hijack and an attempt to make sure that editors who do their job properly won't have time to respond.
This is relevant, and it should be fixed. It is a fact. It is always put into the history. I've never seen this, and it is a direct result of the misbegotten attempt to purge a couple of hundred articles. And all at once, overwhelming the limited number of editors who actively try to save articles, while at the same time trolling those editors to make their job difficult and discourage them with distractions. Apparently it takes no time to resurrect hundreds of Navy Cross/Ship name honorees for deletion. It takes a lot of time to respond and improve all of these articles. This is in fact a second nomination (among many). And given the fact that there is no good faith compliance with WP:Before and a blatant disregard of sources that exist but aren't cited — which do factor in to notability, this sneak attack is (dare I say it) ... a date that will live in infamy. You are distorting the process and rigging the outcomes.
The navy considered him significant enough that they named a warship after him.
Subject meets or exceeds WP:GNG. No compliance with WP:Before. The protocol is that one should not only look at the present cited sources, but available sources, too. 7&6=thirteen ( ) 13:36, 30 January 2021 (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.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 merge to USS Bebas. Consensus is that the subject does not meet the relevant notability guidelines, but the article content would improve the namesake ship's page. What content to merge is left to editor discretion. Even the keep !votes agree that one of the primary claims to notability is getting a ship named after him. The keep !votes are generic and do not address the content/sourcing of the article in question. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 14:46, 2 February 2021 (UTC) reply

Gus George Bebas

Gus George Bebas (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log)
(Find sources:  Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG as a one-time recipient of the Distinguished Flying Cross (United States). Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Lettler hellocontribs 17:00, 23 January 2021 (UTC) reply
This is a procedural hijack and an attempt to make sure that editors who do their job properly won't have time to respond.
This is relevant, and it should be fixed. It is a fact. It is always put into the history. I've never seen this, and it is a direct result of the misbegotten attempt to purge a couple of hundred articles. And all at once, overwhelming the limited number of editors who actively try to save articles, while at the same time trolling those editors to make their job difficult and discourage them with distractions. Apparently it takes no time to resurrect hundreds of Navy Cross/Ship name honorees for deletion. It takes a lot of time to respond and improve all of these articles. This is in fact a second nomination (among many). And given the fact that there is no good faith compliance with WP:Before and a blatant disregard of sources that exist but aren't cited — which do factor in to notability, this sneak attack is (dare I say it) ... a date that will live in infamy. You are distorting the process and rigging the outcomes.
The navy considered him significant enough that they named a warship after him.
Subject meets or exceeds WP:GNG. No compliance with WP:Before. The protocol is that one should not only look at the present cited sources, but available sources, too. 7&6=thirteen ( ) 13:36, 30 January 2021 (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.

Videos

Youtube | Vimeo | Bing

Websites

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Encyclopedia

Google | Yahoo | Bing

Facebook