Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jabez Peters
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 delete. Singularity 06:32, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Jabez Peters
A seaman who died following a shipwreck and was mentioned in a book. Sad, but not particularly notable. Many thousands of seamen have died in a similar manner. Prod notice deleted without explanation except the misleading edit summary "tidy". -- Necrothesp (talk) 08:54, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
-
- Comment Another little victory for you? Albatross2147 (talk) 13:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- I wasn't aware Wikipedia was a competition. -- Necrothesp (talk) 16:31, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Another little victory for you? Albatross2147 (talk) 13:45, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Note There's now an article on the Dundonald (ship), the shipwreck in question and he's mentioned in there. Nick mallory (talk) 11:06, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still doesn't justify an article on individual crew members. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- My point is that this could be deleted because the information is now in another article which is obviously notable. Sorry if I didn't spell that out in simpler terms. Nick mallory (talk) 12:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- As Wikipedia:Notability says, if a subject is not covered in depth in the sources, but only as part of a larger subject, it should be merged into the article about the larger subject. No deletion is required. See User:Uncle G/On notability#Dealing with non-notable things. Article merger does not involve deletion, or administrator tools, at any stage. Even an editor without an account can do it. Uncle G (talk) 13:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- My point is that this could be deleted because the information is now in another article which is obviously notable. Sorry if I didn't spell that out in simpler terms. Nick mallory (talk) 12:24, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Still doesn't justify an article on individual crew members. -- Necrothesp (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:N as the seaman was not remembered for anything too notable, apart from dying. Littleteddy (talk) 12:34, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Also fails WP:BLP1E. Littleteddy (talk) 12:35, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete nn a personal diary reference is not exactly "substantive coverage in reliable sources" that from WP:NOTE. Sting_au Talk 13:17, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, topic covered better in ship's article, so redundant. Not a highly plausible search term. --Dhartung | Talk 21:51, 14 December 2007 (UTC)
- Delete No evidence of notability. Maralia (talk) 05:48, 15 December 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.
