Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Albert Carlos Bates


 * 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. Firm consensus to keep given that NPOL is satisfied. There was also a general consensus that GNG and possibly ACADEMIC were also satisfied. (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 14:41, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Albert Carlos Bates

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Article found via a Teahouse post by, to which and  answered.

I found nothing online that supports notability in view of WP:NACADEMIC. That being said, considering the time period, offline sources may exist.

The closest seem to be his membership in the American Antiquarian Society (not in article, but see first external link); however I think that is not enough to meet NACADEMIC #3. Tigraan Click here to contact me 14:32, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions.  Tigraan Click here to contact me 14:32, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Ping fix: . Tigraan Click here to contact me 14:33, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete. Yes, I am inclined to agree that he is not notable. I have searched newspapers.com and most of what I see is that he gave a few lectures and his collections were auctioned off after his death. I only found one thing indicative of notability: He received an honorary degree. But it was only a master of arts... though it was in an earlier time and a master of arts may have more clout then. Right now it looks like he hasn't done enough to be considered notable. Thanks for nominating the article, . DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Thanks for the ping Tigraan. I just did a Google search and found quite a few hits. This source includes a short biography of the subject, and explains that his papers are archived in the American Antiquarian Society's Archive Collection, and also says that there is a biography of him in the AAS Newsclipping File, and directs you to AAS Proceedings, vol. 64 (21 April 1954), pp. 8-10, which I assume from the context is another biography. I don't have access to it, but I'd have thought that would all contribute significantly toward notability. He's also discussed in some detail on pp130-131 of The Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science: Volume 38 - Supplement 3. I stopped looking at that point, but there are more hits on a Google - I'm convinced he passes WP:GNG based on these sources.  Girth Summit  (blether)  15:43, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment The AAS Proceedings biography can be found here. He was elected to the Connecticut House of Reps (according to the biography). Does he then pass WP:Politicans? DiamondRemley39 (talk) 16:21, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment I wonder what to think of that source. The Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science article listed above, about the Connecticut Historical Society, was written by Diana Ross McCain, who, like Bates, worked for the CHS. And Bates is mentioned on two pages and isn't the subject of the article, yet the coverage is more than a trivial passing mention. Just want to make sure that a kosher independent source. --DiamondRemley39 (talk) 16:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * I guess that one could argue that these sources are not fully independent of the subject, since they are written by people belonging to organisations that he was also a member of. However, they're very reliable academic publications, and I don't see any reason to scrutinise them to death - the subject has been dead for 65 years, we're not worried about self-publicity here, and it's clear enough that he was a distinguished scholar in his day - indeed, as the editor of sixteen issues of the Collections of the Connecticut Historical Society, he's probably notable under criterion 8 of WP:NPROF regardless of WP:GNG. I would be surprised if digging a little deeper into printed records didn't throw up a lot more sources, and I'm satisfied that this is an easy keep. Girth Summit  (blether)  17:09, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * And I just checked WP:NPOLITICIAN. He passes the secondary criterion as having been a member of a legislative body at state level. He's still required to pass the primary criterion, but I can't imagine that he got elected to Connecticut House of Reps without garnering some press coverage along the way - it would just take someone to dig through the press archives of the time to find it. This adds more weight to the notability. Girth Summit  (blether)  19:14, 5 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep as per the reliable sources identified above so that WP:GNG is passed, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 16:03, 5 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep, there is not a whole lot here in terms of sources, although, as noted above, formally sufficient to pass WP:GNG. For me the deciding factor is that the AAS obituary contains detailed and substantial biographical info. So the article can be expanded to actually look like a reasonable biography. Nsk92 (talk) 00:03, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Copmment If he was a member of the Connecticut House of Representatives, that would mean we should keep the article. We also should mention this in the article. In my experience even people who were very significant in past legislatures often lack articles, and they often only get articles for very unrelated reasons, the example that comes to mind easiest is Rendell M. Maybe, whose article survives because of his political roles, but I created the article because of his role in establishing The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Nigeria and writing a book on it.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:25, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Nom comment - switching to keep based on the Conneticut House election / NPOLITICIAN. The sources found by Girth Summit are not enough to my eyes for NACADEMIC or GNG but they are still a reasonable basis to write the article. Tigraan Click here to contact me 15:22, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep Changing my vote to keep due to WP:NPOLITICIAN. Still not seeing him as an Academic, though the content of such sources seems ok. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:34, 6 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep as a member of the Connecticut House of Representatives (passes WP:NPOL. --Enos733 (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions. Enos733 (talk) 17:20, 7 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Keep passes WP:NPOL has been a member of the Connecticut House of Representatives.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 08:20, 8 August 2019 (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.