Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eugene P. Watson
Oh, I guess I'd agree with your basic point about the phrasing "doesn't seem to" in the nomination.  I'm not sure I think it's quite as big a deal as you do, since I don't have much trouble |assuming good faith and thus believing the nominator when he says that what he ''meant'' by that was that "I've read  and in my opinion, this guy doesn't meet it" or something like that. Obviously, I cannot read his mind to make certain, but it seems reasonable to me that his overly concise wording in the nomination could have been an honest mistake.  But that said, yes, I'll agree with your underlying point that the nomination should have been done with better and more precise deletion criteria language than "doesn't seem to merit an entry".  Even granting that the nomination itself was imperfect, though, to me the larger issue is that, as I say, the article as it stands fails to provide references that establish Mr. Watson's notability per . So unless
— User:DGG, 21:15, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
Stance: comment
Cited policy: WP:AGF||WP:BIO||WP:BIO (Wikipedia:Assume good faith)