Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander-Howden
This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.
The result of the debate was to delete the article. --Canderson7 00:15, 23 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Seems to be a completely valueless article. Possibly some individual writing about themself. DirectorStratton 03:46, September 2, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep - I was searching on here about rare surnames and this is all that came up. Don't delete it - give me a good article about rare surnames, or expand it at least. 81.170.12.52 23:37, 7 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory. An article on rare surnames shouldn't even contain a list of rare surnames. DirectorStratton 00:42, September 8, 2005 (UTC)
- Merge with an article on rare surnames. I think such an article/list might be of some value, and most readers would want to see a few examples. What does the Guinness book of world records say?---CH (talk) 00:51, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. No opinion. —Cryptic (talk) 06:41, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unverified nonsense. There is probably a very large number of surnames used only by one person, and anyone can create a new "rare" surname by combining two semi-rare ones. What makes this surname special enough to even be mentioned in an article on rare surnames? And why should we have such an article in the first place? Uppland 07:57, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Agree with Uppland's reasoning. Dlyons493 10:17, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per Uppland. Any combination of two surnames is more unique than its individual constituents. - Mgm|(talk) 11:24, September 12, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete Quite obviously not a rare surname. Both Alexander and Howden are common surnames. - Last Malthusian 15:22, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete unless needed as disambig for people of that name. Martg76 22:44, 12 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as nonsense, as Uppland said. I am a name geek, but can't see any value in an article on rare surnames, either. There are plenty of surnames with only one or two bearers, and this one, being rare only by virtue of hyphenating two more common names, doesn't even legitimately qualify. ManekiNeko | Talk 03:01, 13 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.