Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adam Sherrill


 * 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  no consensus. Jayjg (talk) 06:36, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Adam Sherrill

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No indication of any historical notability. Purely genealogical listing, with no evidence or assertion of real-world impact. CalendarWatcher (talk) 07:00, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:15, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I've had concerns about this persons notability before, which is why this discussion appeared on my watchlist. My main concern was that the claim that he was the first person ever to cross the Catawba River didnt match up with what the reference said. The reference said he was the first white settler in this area, which may or may not confer notability. I think my preferred move here would be a merge and redirect to Sherrills Ford, North Carolina, which appears to have been named for him. I'm aware that there isnt much that can be merged from this article, but its preferable to keep the history, and he is a plausable search term. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 22:05, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This article has been nominated for rescue. Silver  seren C 00:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment I have tagged this article for rescue. Silver  seren C 00:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep I have put some sources in there that should establish notability. Apparently, there is also another Adam Sherrill (his son or grandson, perhaps?) who fought in a war in 1790, so that came up a lot in my search. Silver  seren C 00:28, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep There are news stories about him and books mention him as well .  I used Google news and book search, adding in the name of the river, Catawba, to make sure it was the same guy.  He is a notable historical figure.   D r e a m Focus  11:00, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Being mentioned in a nearly-50-year-old local history book published by the local county historical society -- not the subject, just being mentioned in it, at that -- is truly a desperate scraping of the bottom of the barrel for 'reliable sources'. These 'sources' do not change my characterisation one iota, nor does it provide the slightest evidence, despite the rather grandiose claim above, that he is 'notable historical figure'. This is pure genealogy, not genuine history. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 09:05, 1 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep Good work by Dream Focus. Colonel Warden (talk) 15:04, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
 * A strange new meaning of 'good' I was previously unaware of, as it merely provides the appearance of notability, impact, or even reliable sources without addressing the actual problems. --CalendarWatcher (talk) 09:05, 1 April 2010 (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.