Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Billy Campbell (doctor)

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 Merge to Eco-cemetery. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-11 05:20Z

[edit] Billy Campbell (doctor)

Billy Campbell (doctor) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

not notable. His green cemetery might be notable, but not himself. See also related cases Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joe Sehee, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Woodsen, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tyler Cassity, and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mike Salisbury (2nd nomination). habj 19:14, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

• Delete, fails WP:BIO. This and the related articles seem to be part of a promotional campaign by User:Eulogy4Afriend. – Elisson • T • C • 23:38, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete per Elisson. --Dhartung | Talk 23:47, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
• Delete Merge the stuff about Billy Campbell (and also) Merge the rest to Eco-cemetery. Note: Most of the *article is about an Eco-cemetery and not about the man himself. —Pengo 03:53, 31 January 2007 (UTC)
• DeleteWeak Delete this walled garden. The individuals are not notable, as there are no reliable sources on the subjects, but the movement or the cemetary may be. Ohconfucius 06:52, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

• changed to Weak delete. On reading the references supplied, I would say that the subject is probably known within his realm, and to those who are genuinely seeking a green trip to the beyond. HOwever, subject still fails WP:BIO or mergeto eco-cemetary, as eloquently explained by Elisson. Ohconfucius 08:48, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Notable Person

According to Wikipedia subject-specific notability guidelines, a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself.

Billy Campbell (doctor) has been featured and referenced as the pioneer of the natural burial movement in North America in numerous television programs, radio shows, national newspaper articles, magazines and online resources including:

• LA Times, “Crying and Digging” ^[1]
• The New Yorker Magazine, “California Dying” ^[2]
• The New York Times, “Eco-Friendly Burial Sites Give a Chance to Be Green Forever” ^[3]
• Slate Magazine, “Death Not Be Manicured” ^[4]
• Grave Matters, “Natural Burial” ^[5]
• Environmental Science, “Going Out Green” ^[6]
• AARP Bulletin, “Green Graveyards - A Natural Way to Go” ^[7]
• AFC News Source, “Green Burial” ^[8]
• The Arizona Republic, “Green Burials - A Simple Return to Earth” ^[9]
• The Boston Globe, “`Green' burials usher in the ultimate recycling” ^[10]
• Society for Conservation Biology, “Last Wishes” ^[11] *Environmental News Network, “'Green' Burials Growing in Popularity” ^[12]
• Forbes.com, “'Green' Burials Growing in Popularity” ^[13]
• FCA Biennial Conference 2006, “Being Green - Burial Without the Box” ^[14]
• Green Burial Council, “Advisory Board” ^[15]
• INC.com, “Goodbye and Thank You” ^[16]
• Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, “Rest in peace the green way” ^[17]
• Spirit of MATT, “Eco Friendly Resting Places for Loved Ones” ^[18]
• Seeking Solutions with Suzanne - Comcast, “Green Graveyards” ^[19]
• Richmond Times Dispatch, “Green burial: ecology friendly” ^[20]
• MSNBC News Channel 10, “Green Burial” ^[21]

It is clear that numerous independent authors, scholars, or journalists have decided to give attention to both the emerging trend of Natural Burial in North America as well as Mr. Campbell’s role as a pioneer in the natural burial movement.Because Mr Campbell has been featured in multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, the primary notability criterion to determine whether "the world" has judged this individual and topic to be notable has been met.

The assertion that this research is in some way a promotional campaign or vanity article is totally unfounded, this article is part of a much larger area of research regarding the emerging Natural Burial Movement in North America including eco-cemetery, Joe Sehee, Mike Salisbury, Mary Woodsen, Mark Harris and Tyler Cassity. While the merits of each of these articles will be debated individually, it is important to mention that these are WORKS IN PROCESS. It takes a remarkable amount of time to develop research and write these articles in order to clearly establish the notability and usefulness of these topics. These articles have been identified as stubs in order to encourage collaboration.

While each of these articles are related by subject matter and reference each other as related articles they are also related to eco-cemetery, cremation, and promession. The body of information at this point may be specific in nature however they are certainly not a walled garden.

I would respectfully request that editors choose not to delete or merge these articles before they have been fully developed and referenced. Eulogy4Afriend 17:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

References

Eulogy4Afriend 17:57, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

You misunderstand the notability criteria guideline, or chose to not understand it the way it should be understood. This is aparent from you referencing WP:BIO in the following way: "a topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself.", while a proper referencing would be "a topic is notable if it has been the primary subject of multiple, non-trivial, reliable published works, whose sources are independent of the subject itself." You fail to include only one word, but oh, is that word important. Surely, Campbell is featured in the references you give, but not as the primary subject in a single one of them. The primary subject of all the references you give is the natural burial movement (which thus is notable), not Billy Campbell (thus not notable). – Elisson • T • C • 17:44, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

• Strong Merge. Merge with eco-cemetery. While he is notable enough to be mentioned in a secondary fashion in the articles Eulogy4Afriend posted, there is not indication he passes WP:BIO on his own. Vassyana 10:07, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 18:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

• Merge with relevant articles and redirect to eco-cemetery. I don't understand why people invariably create articles about the leaders of movements rather than the movements themselves. In this case, as is usually true, the concept is bigger than the originator. --N Shar 19:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Keep per this search. For the avoidance of doubt WP:N states that "A topic is notable if it has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject itself and of each other." The WP:BIO wording quoted, in my view, is a contraversial and less significant guideline. Addhoc 14:54, 10 February 2007 (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.