Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles Ramsay Arbuthnot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 keep. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 02:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Charles Ramsay Arbuthnot

Charles Ramsay Arbuthnot (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

This article is just a mess about a non-notable subject. Part of the ongoing quest to clear up and tidy the many Arbuthnot pages. I suggest it is deleted, if anything further ever comes to light it always be re-created but at the moment it is an embarrassment to the project. Giano 21:45, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletions. -- Carom 22:38, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
  • As usual, Delete unless expanded. While his service record is not the most informative document on the planet, one thing that is clear is that he was a Rear Admiral and not an Admiral. Since he was in this rank 1904-1913 - one of the few periods Britain wasn't in a war - it seems unlikely he had the opportunity to distinguish himself — iridescenti (talk to me!) 22:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Actually he was promoted from Vice Admiral to Admiral on the retired list, September 19, 1911 (September 22, 1911 London Gazette) also see the obituary from the Times below to see if that changes your mind. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 01:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete Wikipedia is not a geneology site, and once you remove all of the family relations, there really isn't anything there. Resolute 23:42, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Keep per Gustav. Seems this is one of the more minimally notable Arbuthnot's. Resolute 02:13, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

*Delete - He does not seem to have any notable accomplishments or reliable sources, other than his service record. Change to Keep - Gustav has provided some pretty convincing evidence, chiefly the obituary. If this man just died yesterday, he'd certainly have his own article. Let's not be victims of recentism, now. -- Cielomobile talk / contribs 00:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

  • I think I'll actually vote Keep on this one as he has quite a long obituary in the Times-
  • "OBITUARY - ADMIRAL C. R. ARBUTHNOT. Admiral Charles Ramsey Arbuthnot died yester­day morning at his residence. Selwood Lodge, Frome, in his 64th year. He was the second son of the late Mr. George Clerk Arbuthnot, of Mavisbank, Mid Lothian, and entered the Navy as a cadet in September, 1863. In 1871 he was promoted to the rank of lieutenant from the Royal yacht, and became a flag officer in 1904, retiring-in 1907 and being promoted to admiral in 1911. He served in the Arctic yacht Pandora in 1876-76 and was awarded the Arctic medal. From 1892 to 1895 he commanded the Orlando, flagship in Australia, and from 1900 to 1903 was in charge of the Cambridge, School of Gunnery, at Devonport. He acted as Naval Aide-­de-Camp to King Edward, and in that capacity was in attendance on his Majesty on the occasion of his Coronation. Since his retirement, Admiral Arbuthnot was prominently associated with the Unionist Party in Somerset and represented Frome on the County Council. He was a Fellow of the Royal Geographical Society. Admiral Arbuthnot married in 1880 Emily Caroline who died in 1910), daughter of the late Rear-Admiral C. F. Schomberg, and leaves a son. Lieutenant G.S. Arbuthnot, R.N., and two daughters. The funeral will take place-at Frome on Friday, at 1.30.". Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 01:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep even just from the article-- this is not trivial, but I am not sure just what it corresponds to in the US. "Aide-de-Camp to King Edward VII.", and from the obit, apparently an arctic explorer. The failure to properly highlight this information and show its importance did not help the article; as seems to be typical with this family, there is often something there. DGG 01:16, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak Delete. I'm curious about the status and importance of a Naval Aide-de-Camp to the King, but unless that title has an exceptional amount of inherent notability, there still remains a serious deficit of notability for this individual. Changed to Keep, see below. --Hemlock Martinis 01:20, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment His specific title (aides-de-camp differ in importance depending on the era, the ADC's rank, their qualifications, and who exactly they're ADC to) is not exactly equal to any American title, but at the time it would have been a more powerful and important role than it is now. I'd say roughly equivalent to a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff in the modern US. More or less. --Charlene 02:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Where on earth have you found that information - ADC to the King is in no way equivalent to "Joint Chiefs of Staff" - it is an honory title given for a short duration to an officer denoting no huge power at all - in fact very little beyond cermonial duties - rather like a Lord-in-waiting and secratary combined wearing uniform. He was certainly not a Personal-ADC. See Aide-de-camp. Giano 09:03, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
      • Thank you! I change my vote to Keep. --Hemlock Martinis 02:24, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
        • Comment - Where are you getting "equivalent to the Joint Chiefs of Staff" from? In the UK, Aide de Camp to the Monarch is (and was then) a purely ceremonial role (given that the monarch hasn't personally fought in battle since King Billy), whilst in the US Aide de Camp is the guy who organises a general's staff (hiring secretaries, making sure the staff car turns up on time, etc). Incidentally, the Arctic medal was "awarded to all who participated in any Polar expedition", not for any specific achievement — iridescenti (talk to me!) 02:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep. He appears notable due to his rank as ADC to King Edward, which at the time was a more important position than an ADC to the Queen in 2007. --Charlene 02:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Artic medal winner, high-ranking admiral in the Royal Navy. Added a citation. --Infrangible 02:55, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • KeepThis subject has notability in comparison to, or greater than, any number of historical bios on wiki. (maybe this says something about the bigger picture but, it should be a level playing field}. --Stormbay 03:38, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
Comment OK, on Aide-de-camp it says: "Equerries are equivalents to Aides-de-Camp in the Royal Household, in which ADC's are restricted to senior officers with a primarily honorific role" so the role may be less significant than I thought. Gustav von Humpelschmumpel 09:37, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep as there seems to be precious little actual accomplishment (lieutenant on a boat that went north, routine service in the south seas, etc.), but he was a fellow of the R.G.S. and had a ceremonial accolade at the end of his career, so just barely. If I were related to him I'd be proud, but this just seems like a dictionary of biography entry, not someone who is really notable. --Dhartung | Talk 09:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep multiple sources and an Admiral Kernel Saunters 11:26, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, seems notable enough to me, and it's all fairly well-referenced. -Hit bull, win steak(Moo!) 14:21, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - I have had to think for a while about this one, but I have come around to asking myself if a junior admiral should be treated any different from a junior general. Yes, he commanded a few ships and the Devonshire gunnery school; yes, he got a medal (probably more than one); yes, he was an ADC. But none of those is was really a particularly notable achievement. Did he actually do anything of note? We don't even have an article on his Australian command, HMS Orlando (the name ship for the Orlando-class cruisers; we do have an article on an earlier HMS Orlando, which was scrapped in 1871) nor the gunnery school (I believe this is HMS Cambridge), and it is is not clear whether the Pandora is any of the ones mentioned at HMS Pandora. -- ALoan (Talk) 10:28, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
But since any naval vessel is considered notable, we could easily have these articles. DGG 03:03, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - close but no cigar. He obviously had a good solid worthy and unexceptional career, but on the basis of the article + the above obit he just doesn't seem to have done anything beyond the norm. ADC and RGS connections are red herrings: distinguished but not in themselves noteworthy enough to justify an article. HeartofaDog 01:29, 3 June 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.