Talk:Samuel Youngs

Title
This appears to duplicate the article Samuel Young (Sleepy Hollow). Which is correct? Boleyn2 (talk) 18:18, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

ProD
The reason I PRODded this article is because although his story inspired a film, it doesn't seem to make him notable himself. I saw teachers as coming under the section, and criteria, given below on WP:BIO, which, from the article, he doesn't seem to meet:

Scientists, academics, economists, professors, authors, editors, journalists, filmmakers, photographers, artists, architects, engineers, and other creative professionals:

''The person is regarded as an important figure or is widely cited by their peers or successors. The person is known for originating a significant new concept, theory or technique. The person has created, or played a major role in co-creating, a significant or well-known work, or collective body of work, which has been the subject of an independent book or feature-length film, or of multiple independent periodical articles or reviews.'' The person's work either (a) has become a significant monument, (b) has been a substantial part of a significant exhibition, (c) has won significant critical attention, or (d) is represented within the permanent collections of several notable galleries or museums, or had works in many significant libraries.

He could also, possibly, be considered under:

Any biography ''The person has received a notable award or honor, or has been often nominated for them. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field.[7]''

However, although there is the film, he has not made a widely recognized contribution in in his specific field, whih is education. Boleyn (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think you're mistaken in seeing the kinds of notability too narrowly; for instance we have bios on people notable just bcz someone killed them, not bcz violent death is notable, but bcz in the individual case, the violent death made them recognizable by name. In this case, he's notable for nothing he did, but as the model for something sufficiently notable that probably every scrap of what might have contributed to the creation of the character is of interest, even if only as a matter of futile speculation. At worst, i'd like to see this merged as a section within Legend of Sleepy Hollow.  BTW, your English is great, so i hope you have one of them Limey accents [wink]: it's not just a movie, but perhaps the first notable American work of fiction, so if you're a Yank, shame again on our shitty educational system (which would be the only reason for not saying shame on the Yanks who think it's just a film). I probably read it only once, but i recall Beau Brummel and Priscilla Mullins or Mullens. And Ichabod Crane, who in the face of the apparent apparition of a mounted but beheaded Tory (Loyalist) (or probably, rather, Hessian mercenary) soldier, tried to whistle away his fear but (i swear) "his tongue clove to the roof of his mouth"! I think i still recall that clause, every time i'm frightened by my surroundings.) I was also taken to Irving's home in Tarrytown, NY in grade school, and i can still picture its layout relative to the river bank.  Hmmm. I guess i've proven i have too little objectivity to be the one who removes the ProD tag! --Jerzy•t 11:29, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think i've not given much of the logic of that position, and it may be important to say (without doing the research that deserves doing to verify that i'm talking abt fitting the guidelines and my gut together, rather than just ignoring the guidelines) that i think 99% or more of the bio deletions we do are for people whom some see as notable for what they have done or are recognized for, but have done too little or been too indifferently recognized for those claims to be accepted. And i'm reporting on my gut, which says that it's crucial to understand whether it's that typical kind of claim of notability, before being, well, distracted by the patent failure to meet those criteria for such claims. This implicit claim of notability is much harder to evaluate, largely bcz we have so little experience evaluating those of its kind. That said, i see via Ichabod Crane that i inserted two wrong names into my account [blush]: i'm guessing Beau Brummel was a Victorian British dandy, and Priscilla Mullins John Alden's intended. And i think the accompanying article is a good candidate for a section in Ichabod Crane, with (as i assume is obvious) Rdrs from the two SY titles mentioned above. While AfD could produce that result, the result could of course be achieved without the overhead of  AfD. --Jerzy•t 21:10, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I've removed the PROD because I think you'd made a good case for this, Jerzy, and you're right that I need to sometimes think about notability in a wider sense. Thanks for complimenting me on my English, I do indeed have one of them Limey accents! I appreciate you taking the time to explain your point. Boleyn2 (talk) 10:28, 22 February 2009 (UTC)