Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Easterly

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 discussion was no consensus - default to keep Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 01:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Harry Easterly

Delete non notable individual who fails to meet WP:BIO. Simply serving as a director of a golf association does not make him notable or encyclopedic. Strothra 15:56, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Millions of ghits (well slightly exagerated, but you know what I mean. DavidHumphreys ^{SPEAK TO ME}ABOUT _{THE THINGS I MESSED UP} 16:01, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Google hit counts do not establish notability in the article or the notability of the individual in general. When did google become the definition of notability?--Strothra 16:04, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. It's not just "a golf association", it's the USGA - governing body for golf in the US and Mexico since 1894. Plenty of web hits on reputable golf sites (e.g., Golf Digest), and Easterly is notable enough that ESPN, CBS Sportsline, and The Boston Globe (among many others) saw fit to publish obituaries on him. Dsreyn 16:17, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
  • Re query from Strothra -- Here DavidHumphreys ^{SPEAK TO ME}ABOUT _{THE THINGS I MESSED UP} 16:41, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Right, I'm quite aware of that, but it's not policy and even it doesn't say anything about the use of google to defintively proove notability. --Strothra 17:55, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment. For what it's worth, notability isn't a policy either, even though it is frequently used to justify deletion. Dsreyn 19:33, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep as notable. Those obit links from Dsreyn should ideally be added to the article as references. --DaveG12345 16:47, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

Comment. Added the obits as references. Dsreyn 17:05, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

• Weak Delete Although I don't think that such a position should qualify automatically for inclusion, I recognise the prominence. Even so, I am unconvinced that such figures have the right degree of notability. It's not whether one holds a position that is relevant, it is how the role is fulfilled. -- Alias Flood 19:22, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep seems to have been the equivalent of Commissioner of a major sport which would make him notable ex officio, IMO. Eluchil404 02:21, 10 July 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.