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. sufficient consensus DGG ( talk ) 06:11, 30 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ken Leistner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet WP:BLP or WP:GNG. References are all broken links. Delta13C (talk) 22:56, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: promo-style article for non-notable (fails WP:BLP and WP:GNG). Quis separabit? 23:52, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - Fails GNG quite severely. 20:25, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
• Delete - Per nom. --Seduisant (talk) 21:29, 28 November 2015 (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.