Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brian masterson


 * 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 Delete as lacking sources. I will be happy to provide the author a userfied copy upon request, if she intends to work to add sources to the article; it could then be moved back to the main article space. Shimeru 16:02, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Brian masterson

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

I can find no mentions whatsoever of this individual online. This is very suspicious, considering how famous he supposedly is:
 * "Brian Masterson" AND (potholing OR caving) does not result in anything relevant;
 * "Brian Masterson" AND Henry AND Stanley likewise comes up empty, although he's supposed to have taken the most regocnized portrait of the explorer;
 * "Robert Ishmael Masters" results in 0 Ghits;
 * No record of a Bolshevik War Memorial in Sebastopol;
 * No evidence of any plaque in Ros Galliv;
 * And – although I could be completely wrong on this – was "Brian" even a given name in 1875? ... disco spinster   talk  19:18, 28 March 2007 (UTC)


 *  Weak delete Strong delete- A lot of work went into this one. Hopefully somebody can come up with some sources.--Ng.j 06:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Couldn't find anything either through my own use of Google. It is suspicious that this is the only article the author edited.--Ng.j 06:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

A lot of your comments are definitely valid. Yes, this is my only edit/created page. You could also say that this is my FIRST edited or created page. Everybody has to start somewhere. As to Why I started here, well, you will notice that I have the same name as his mother. Coincidence? No, because I am a relation. A relation who is working on my thesis about Brian Masterson. So, excuse me if I have highlighted a person who I have an affinity to - I didn't know that wasn't allowed. As for sources/links/documents etc - again very true, I haven't provided any. Even the photo that I have (or rather, the scan of the photo that I have) hasn't been included. Apologies again, but I was only going to update this as and when I had the time. I don't seriously believe that this article will be the most searched on Wikipedia. And yes, some of it is informed speculation - I can't prove that he is the same Marconi radio operator, but I made that quite clear in the article. I've left it up to the reader to make the final decision.

If I put my hand on my heart I will admit that he was a minor character, and that no doubt his work doesn't rank up there with the great early photographers. But that doesn't mean that it's okay to blank him. Why not include him? He may not have done the greatest of deeds, but he led a far more interesting life than mine and was close to great things.

And may I just say one final thing - we mightn't all be high and mighty Wikipedia editors, but maybe some of the critique-ing of this document should be done with somewhat less of a sneer. Thanks.
 * Delete. Without proper attribution of reliable sources, there is no way to distinguish this between something real and a hoax.  Burntsauce 21:35, 30 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Move to user page I love these kinds of pages. But I think they work better as independent sites away from wiki. Wikipedia is NOT a good place to write your thesis; not because we're too good for your original research, but because the site is not good enough for original research. We're not set up to effectively catch vandalism. Ventifax 23:44, 2 April 2007 (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.