Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clark W. Roberts

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 of the debate was del. `'mikka (t) 00:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Clark W. Roberts

Not sure what to do with this one. Roberts once owned the land that the Palmer House was built upon. Is that sufficient to establish notability? I'm inclined to say "no", but that is why this forum exists. Medtopic 04:55, 10 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. It seems notable, at least to me. Article seems somewhat informative as well. Bp28 05:09, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy delete as nn-bio. The article does not contain a single assertion of notability; subject was a minor officer in the Mexican-American War, and owned some land that was later used to build a well-known hotel. (I'm even dubious about that; if he owned 160 acres in central Chicago in the latter half of the 19th century, he probably would have been the equivalent of a billionaire; if it was in the early 19th century, he has no connection except fortuity to the Palmer House.) MCB 05:15, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - I don't think an obituary counts as notability. I don't know that it qualifies for speedy though - especially since the nomination is contested. ENpeeOHvee 05:45, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as non-notable per MCB, but not speedily (it cites a newspaper article for notability) Sandstein 05:50, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as above, nn. --Crossmr 06:49, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Having owned a parcel of land is of no great significance if it was others who developed the land or turned it into what it became. Balance of article is nn as well. Looks like an obiturary piece, which is what Wikipedia is not. Agent 86 07:01, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Merely owning the land upon which a notable building was constructed isn't sufficient to qualify as a notable biography.  (aeropagitica)  (talk)  08:20, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak Delete Although the article is verified, owning a parcel of land is of no great significance. Moreover, the subject in question was only a minor officer. --Siva1979^{Talk to me} 20:46, 10 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, and I know full well that this guy probably doesn't meet WP:BIO, but it's verifiable, is an interesting little article as it stands, and is probably expandible with some significant effort. Worth dismissing the guideline for me. --badlydrawnjeff talk 16:03, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Couldn't come up with any news articles using Lexis Nexis. The most notable thing about him is that he owned a bunch of land in Chicago, but if there wasn't even an article about his death in Chicago papers, I'd say that's not very notable. Aguerriero (talk) 16:36, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, this is a memorial, and WP:NOT a memorial. Mangojuice^talk 19:11, 12 June 2006 (UTC)
• keepverifiable, well written, some information content, likely notable that he owned this landJoan-of-arc 00:50, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
• Weak delete. Doesn't quite reach notability. LotLE×talk 06:35, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Sorry, it reads as an obit. StuffOfInterest 15:41, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete since he clearly fails WP:BIO. I dislike "notable by association" in most cases... and this is a flimsy association. I don't think there is any expandability to this article. He had one newspaper article about him... any other RS out there on him? I'm might be open to changing my opinion if more WP:RS can be found.. ---J.S (t|c) 16:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
• del nn. `'mikka (t) 00:56, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

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.