Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Alexander Marshall


 * 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The result was Nomination withdrawn. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 00:34, 17 December 2008 (UTC)

Alexander Marshall

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Withdrawn by nominator - see biography turned up by Suntag below.  Request an Admin closes the discussion. Springnuts (talk) 20:24, 16 December 2008 (UTC)  Two issues here: first is the lack of notability of this man. Lots of people are involved with pioneering work; this is not especially notable. He might merit a passing reference in Gospel Hall Brethren. The second issue is the lack of sources. Yes he existed, and wrote a 23 page book - I guess an evangelistic tract - but there are no reliable sources offering significant coverage (which addresses 'the subject directly in detail, and no original research is needed to extract the content. Significant coverage is more than trivial but may be less than exclusive') of this person. There is no indication that he 'has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field' - which would give notability under WP:BIO - see Notability (people). -- Springnuts (talk) 23:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I should add that I made a sad hash of an attempt to add this to the following AfD: [] but this article was not discussed at all there, and the nomination of this article was dealt with by a procedural keep. Springnuts (talk) 23:02, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Geesh, even Gospel Hall Brethren doesn't contain enough context for me to determine if that organization is notable, let alone one of it's "founders". What a mess.  I agree there's no indication here of notability, but a lot depends on how important the Gospel Hall Brethren movement is, and how important he was to it.  Powers T 23:54, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. Some of these books appear to mention the subject, but with Google only displaying snippets in most cases it's difficult to tell whether the coverage is substantial enough for notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:29, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
 * response - it's hard to say - [] may be a source - it is hard to work the others out from the snippets we can see. If it needs a great deal of original research then it doesn't belong in Wikipedia. I would be delighted to withdraw the AfD if there are sources.  I will flag it for rescue.  Springnuts (talk) 21:03, 13 December 2008 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Symbol delete vote.svg|15px]] Delete — Essentially, delete per nom, as the initial rationale covers it. Google search can't find anything that leads me to determine he needs more than a paragraph in an article; not nearly enough is there for a full article. NW&#39;s Public Sock (talk) 20:58, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:BIO concerns. Orderinchaos 16:58, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - Apparently, "God's Way of Salvation" has sold millions of copies, which may account for the interest in Alexander Marshall's life. Also, if Google's displayed snippets make it difficult to tell whether the coverage is substantial enough for notability, then that does not seem to be a basis to draw a delete conclusion. -- Suntag  ☼  14:19, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Suntag's search shows that a 159 page biography has been published about the subject - a definite proof of notability. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:08, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Good effort Suntag - ... even though "one source produced by ... those with a strong connection to [the subject is] unlikely to be strong evidence of interest by the world at large," and many of these - - are refs to other people, or clearly passing refs.  All that said, I would not have nominated an article with a plethora of passing refs and a published biography, and agree that it should stay.  Springnuts (talk) 20:20, 16 December 2008 (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.