Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Avery (captain)

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 Nominator conceded points of notability. Also WP:SNOW. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 14:24, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] James Avery (captain)

James Avery (captain) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Non-notable figure. Article fails to establish notability and provides no references. Grsz 11 19:12, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Non Notable. Keep if someone can find references that proves he is notable. Izzy007 Talk 19:16, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
Keep, enough references, notable Izzy007 Talk 00:39, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - The fact there there is a bust statue located is a good sign that he has some level of notability. I will do research for more refs. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 19:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - Grsz, the article clearly asserts notability. It may not be referenced but there are MULTIPLE statements that assert the notability of this individual. You are welcome to add {{references}} tags to an article to requeste that references be added. Have I missed something in this article? Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 19:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Material on very early colonial folks is very hard to come by. If the statue and information about the subject, limited though it is, have survived three hundred years, he's notable.Lkleinow (talk) 20:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • KEEP. I do not believe that anybody would place a statue bust of James Avery in both Groton and New London,Connecticut, unless they were of notabilty.(Lookinhere (talk) 20:06, 27 March 2008 (UTC))
  • I suggest Grsz retract his deletion tag, it is unfounded.(Lookinhere (talk) 20:14, 27 March 2008 (UTC))
Comment - Statements like this certainly don't help the project. This AFD has led to an establishment of notability by Chrislk. Now that this has been done, it's worthy of inclusion. Grsz 11 21:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • So now that the person that placed the AFD has changed his opinion on the worthyness of James Avery, why has ne not removed the AFD? There is not one person think the AFD is valid.(Lookinhere (talk) 06:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC))
Stay cool and let the process finish. It won't be deleted, so there's no reason to make a fuss about it. Grsz 11 06:19, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
      • Acording to the AFD tag, you were supposed to place this on my talk page:
An article that you have been involved in editing, James Avery (captain), has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/James Avery (captain). Thank you.,

you did not Please don't expect everyone but younzself to pay strict attention to the rules. Don't embarrass younzself any further please. Best to sit back and wait yourself. (Lookinhere (talk) 06:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC))

        • Dude, calm down. That tag was place don your talk page. I however had personaly notified you so i removed the tag which was extraneous (as a courtesy to you). If your comment is not DIRECTLY related to artuicle upf or AFD, dont make it here. You will only escalate things. Thanks! Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 14:23, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Its ok, let it run its course. I understand it is frustrating but i assure you, all of this is in place for the good of this project. It will be taken off as soon as the AFD is closed! Thanks again for your contributions. Chrislk02 Chris Kreider 20:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
    • Agree with Chris, the AfD gets you attention and help fixing up an otherwise marginal article. It'll be kept but let it run.Lkleinow (talk) 20:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Like John Stark and Israel Putnam, James Avery is considered by New England historians to be a notable figure in the colonial era of the United States. Given time and patience, this article could become quite informative, as well as an excellent addition to Wikipedia. Flask (talk) 20:41, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. I'm leery of the "anybody we can name from this period" standard, but his command of militias during King Philip's War is documented and he was in command of the Pequot Indians (allies) during the battle aka the Great Swamp Fight per multiple sources, so meets WP:MILMOS#NOTE. Genealogical significance is not really something we consider except as a leading indicator. Lookinhre, please observe WP:AGF and instead of attacking the nominator, make a case for notability. --Dhartung | Talk 21:04, 27 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Grsz just beat me to the realization that the "General Court" referred to is the predecessor of the Connecticut General Assembly, making him the equivalent of a state or (arguably) national legislator, and clearly passing WP:BIO. --Dhartung | Talk 07:06, 28 March 2008 (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.