Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jesse Hughes (2nd nomination)

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 debate was Keep. Stifle 02:13, 8 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Jesse Hughes

From speedy as "reposted content", but the deleted content is about somebody else. No vote. r3m0t ^talk 18:50, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

• Keep cited; seems to have been an early frontiersman. Tom Harrison ^Talk 19:15, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Why is this here? -- JJay 20:41, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
• This ended up here because normal contributors can't see the content of previously deleted articles, and this specific article title was deleted just yesterday, and a NEW article created with the same name today. So without any way to see whether it was the same content it was speedied, and someone from the speedy deletion section instead switched it to AFD instead of closing the nomination due to it not being a recreation of the previous article. Nezu Chiza 22:33, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

• Gotcha. Thanks for the response. Seems logical in this case to skip the AfD. -- JJay 00:05, 3 January 2006 (UTC)

• Speedy keep as not reposted content, and wouldn't otherwise be nominated for deletion. —Quarl ^(talk) 2006-01-03 00:05Z
• Speedy keep, it's not necessary to come to afd if the speedy claim is clearly wrong. Gazpacho 03:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Sorry for all the confusion. I actually saw the previous speedy and when I saw all the Google hits for the frontiersman, I thought, "Why not? He seems encyclopedic." I'm not sure if my vote is necessary anymore, but here it is. I created the article under discussion using the cited sources. If you look at the first one, which lists books of frontiermen, pioneers, etc., you will find one explicitly lists Jesse Hughes in the title, and several have him as one of several described. So he certainly is not as notable as Daniel Boone, Davy Crockett, or even Grizzly Adams (perhaps), but still notable enough for inclusion, in my opinion. In the South, he seems particularly well-known. --C S (Talk) 05:20, 3 January 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.