Talk:Paul L. Troast

Primary

There are 6 references, only the obit is used more than once, it is not overly dependent on any ref, let alone a primary one, so I am removing the tag. You seem to be confusing quotations of secondary material with primary documents.--RAN (talk) 13:50, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

The issue has been addressed, I'm not going to argue a moot point.--Rusf10 (talk) 15:52, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

Rusf10, how about chipping in and improving articles. WP:BEFORE is an obligation placed on you as the potential nominator, here and elsewhere, of articles for deletion. I've never seen any evidence that WP:BEFORE was followed on your part and there are no articles where it appears that you've taken the steps to address concerns of notability by editing and adding sources. I know that this whole crusade of deletion is based on some bizarre spite about the number of notable people from Teaneck, but the overwhelming majority of the articles you've attacked have been retained, despite your best efforts to destroy them. Maybe the destruction can be mitigated by some constructive work on your part that improves articles and the encyclopedia as a whole. Alansohn (talk) 17:04, 28 December 2017 (UTC)

You have some serious issues. This article has nothing to do with your precious Teaneck (and despite your wacky theory, I am not on a crusade to delete every article about that town). Believe it or not, most articles I nominate for deletion are deleted. In fact, I've used PROD for similar articles that weren't NJ-related topics without controversy. But, I'm not trying to keep score like you, see WP:WINNING. Also, I did NOT nominate this article for deletion. I just thought it could be written better since the body of the article consisted mostly of quotes.--Rusf10 (talk) 18:16, 28 December 2017 (UTC)