Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alec Sutherland


 * 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. Randykitty (talk) 13:00, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Alec Sutherland

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:GNG. Seems to be a regular Bomber Command member. Lettlerhello • contribs 22:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 22:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 22:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions. Lettlerhello • contribs 22:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the Article Rescue Squadron's list of content for rescue consideration. 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - doesn't appear notable for his war service, despite the statement in the lead. He will have been one of thousands of Britishers who served in Bomber Command. The MBE doesn't add to notability, I understand from previous discussions that an OBE is not sufficient in its own right so this will be the same for the lowest class of the order. Zawed (talk) 02:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - doesn't appear notable for his war service, despite the statement in the lead. He will have been one of thousands of Britishers who served in Bomber Command. The MBE doesn't add to notability, I understand from previous discussions that an OBE is not sufficient in its own right so this will be the same for the lowest class of the order. Zawed (talk) 02:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete lacks SIGCOV in multiple RS necessary to satisfy WP:GNG. Mztourist (talk) 10:56, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Agree with two aboveBashereyre (talk) 08:16, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Just not enough for GNG. Intothatdarkness 13:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: coverage is weak and reliable sources not found. Fails GNG. TheDreamBoat (talk) 10:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - I agree with the above that there is nothing in the article to suggest that he meets any notability requirements. Dunarc (talk) 20:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)  - See below
 * Comment Does anybody here even bother to look for sources? And possible improvements, instead of deletion? WP:Before   7&amp;6=thirteen (☎) 17:13, 1 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Comment A lengthy obituary doesn't mean he's notable. And casting aspersions doesn't help you case, in my view. Intothatdarkness 19:49, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * No "aspersions" intended. Nor was I "making a case."  I was simply asking a question.  If the shoe fits ... 7&amp;6=thirteen (☎</b>) 01:19, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You claim that you weren't casting aspersions, but conclude with "if the shoe fits" which undermines your earlier denial. I would remind you of your recent warning at ANI. Mztourist (talk) 04:36, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * The obituaries mentioned don't add anything to the article in terms of notability. NOTAMEMORIAL and all that. I did check for RS mention of Sutherland and found nothing that would distinguish him as notable. Obituaries are not neutral, and there doesn't seem to be anything else out there about him. Intothatdarkness 01:31, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I do think that the exended obituary in The Scotsman has a lot to say. It goes on in detail about his activities, particularly while in service.  And it came out of their newsroom with byline.  So it should not be dismissed as a source.
 * Indeed, he apparently has multiple extended obituaries. I tried to update the article to better reflect that.
 * Whether Mr. Sutherland meets the thresholds for inclusion of Wikipedia is the remaining question. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 11:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * A lengthy obituary doesn't mean he's notable. Actually, if it's in a major national newspaper, yes it does, by longstanding consensus. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:43, 8 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete - meets neither WP:GNG or WP:NSOLDIER.  Onel 5969  <i style="color:blue">TT me</i> 20:26, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Multiple awards and multiple detailed obituaries providing lots of the biographical detail so conspicuously missing from the recent FA. The subject clearly passes WP:ANYBIO and WP:BASIC. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:23, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep for reasons cited above.  Clearly notable beyond being a soldier.  Not the article it was when proposed for deletion.  WP:Preserve WP:HEY.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 14:21, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment Can someone point me to the guideline that says lengthy obits in major reliable publications do not indicate notability? Because that appears to be the guideline the delete votes are based on and I would like to read it more carefully. Thank you.-- Green  C  15:40, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It's an essay, but WP:OTTO is a good starting point in my view when it comes to newspapers in general. An obituary is not automatically a secondary or disinterested source. In this case, the unattributed obit in the Herald came out before the one in the Scotsman. It's not easy to determine if the first was contributed by the family, and the second one could have been copied from the Herald with some slight modifications. Intothatdarkness 16:42, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It's an irrelevant essay. The facts and the new and expanded sourcing have superseded the argument.
 * Easily surpasses WP:GNG. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 18:35, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * It's relevant to the question of newspapers and obituaries contained therein. Intothatdarkness 18:59, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Huh?
 * You might read what I posted and the sources. They aren't all obituaries.  <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 19:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * But you are entitled to your opinion and assertion. <b style="color:#060">7&amp;6=thirteen</b> (<b style="color:#000">☎</b>) 19:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You might wish to read GreenC's question again, which was inquiring specifically about long obituaries in reliable publications. As both were technically from newspapers I referred to that essay. Intothatdarkness 19:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I read the essay and while I understand the concern that some journalists write some articles based on hearsay or whatever sounds good without doing much factual verification, there is no evidence of that being a problem in this particular case. --  Green  C  19:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * You might wish to read GreenC's question again, which was inquiring specifically about long obituaries in reliable publications. As both were technically from newspapers I referred to that essay. Intothatdarkness 19:25, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * I read the essay and while I understand the concern that some journalists write some articles based on hearsay or whatever sounds good without doing much factual verification, there is no evidence of that being a problem in this particular case. --  Green  C  19:55, 2 April 2021 (UTC)

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - article has been significantly expanded since the nomination, both with content and sourcing. Perhaps those seeking deletion should review and reconsider...? Also, both Andrew and 7&6=13 make good arguments. - wolf  19:32, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete: fails WP:GNG and WP:NSOLDIER CommanderWaterford (talk) 20:47, 2 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. Passes the WP:GNG, WP:NSOLDIER, WP:ANYBIO, and WP:BASIC that in this case come awfully close. gidonb (talk) 20:44, 3 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please avoid using WP:NSOLDIER. If you actually click on the link, you will find that the guideline is deprecated. ~  Aseleste  (t, e &#124; c, l) 03:01, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Randykitty (talk) 16:24, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Editors have posted multiple RS with significant coverage. Further, these appear to be more than just obituaries, but full news articles covering the subject's achievements.  The Scotsman article alone gives us enough biographical information for a full article. Hyperion35 (talk) 20:22, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete. Doesn't meet general notability guidelines. Rondolinda (talk) 22:23, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Rondolinda, please provide a rationale for why all these sources do not meet GNG. Your activity on Wikipedia seems to consist mostly of voting Delete in AfD with the same generic explanation and no underlying arguments specific to the case. -- Green  C  20:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)


 * Weak keep - There seems to be some coverage in sources. Article could use some cleanup. Please stop using the deprecated WP:SOLDIER essay. -Indy beetle (talk) 05:55, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Seems notable to me: got a third of a page obituary in major Scottish newspaper (The Herald) https://www.pressreader.com/uk/the-herald-1130/20140503/page/18 Piecesofuk (talk) 18:17, 5 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep due to passing ANYBIO and otherwise; reiterating that NSOLIDER is explicitly deprecated and inappropriate. <b style="color:#000">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 12:11, 6 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. An obit in a major national newspaper like The Scotsman has always been held as equating to notability. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:41, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails GNG.--MadD (talk) 11:15, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. Obituaries in major national newspapers clearly count as significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. -- Necrothesp (talk) 12:16, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * How does a user that just joined 2 days ago suddenly find their way to AfD? Have they already read all the relevant policies & guidelines, and everything else necessary for an informed !vote? - wolf 14:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)
 * MADdi0X has been blocked for sockpuppetry. RecycledPixels (talk) 17:05, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Make that globally locked (fyi) - wolf 18:04, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep Multiple sources demonstrate SIGCOV per GNG. Article has been greatly improved since first nom. -- Green  C  03:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep He has significant coverage in reliable sources such as this: https://www.scotsman.com/news/obituaries/obituary-alec-sutherland-mbe-bomber-command-veteran-1538095  D r e a m Focus  00:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment - Given the improvements to the article, and the additional sources that have been added which suggest notability that was not apparent when the article was nominated, I now think that the case for Keep is much stronger than it was when I previously commented and I would now lean towards keeping rather than supporting deletion. Dunarc (talk) 22:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep - significantly improved since nomination and sources exists to meet GNG. Riteboke (talk) 07:14, 14 April 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> 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.