Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles "Jock" Love


 * 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. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 19:24, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Charles "Jock" Love

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Subject of article does not appear to meet WP:SOLDIER nor WP:GNG Melcous (talk) 08:03, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. ʍaɦʋɛօtʍ (talk) 08:40, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:06, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Speedy Delete. Poorly written. Un-sourced. I'll note that BEFOREing this was difficult due to the common name of the subject - so possibly I've missed something, however the article itself doesn't assert notability in any significant fashion. A complete fail of SOLDIER (low rank, only campaign medals, nothing significant he did). The article itself was probably sourced from his service record - onto which the record of his unit at the time was superimposed. Nothing post-war described would assert notability.Icewhiz (talk) 14:22, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject isn't notable. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 14:24, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable; does not meet WP:SOLDIER; trivial. Kierzek (talk) 17:45, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails the no original research policy and partially the verifiability policy (in the personal details); the article states that it is based on primary sources, only cites primary sources, and I don't find any secondary sources searching the usual suspects. If there is a more Australian-focused newspapers.com type site, perhaps someone can check there. Similarly, perhaps there is more offline, so I'd be willing to reconsider if evidence were provided that an article on this subject is possible without OR. Smmurphy(Talk) 18:10, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * For the record, we have Trove, an extensive digital archive of Australian newspapers. Couldn't find anything.   Hawkeye7   (discuss)  06:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Junior NCO who won no decorations. Admirable but not notable. Pure family history. -- Necrothesp (talk) 21:37, 8 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -- A NN NCO. The engagements of his units may be notable, but that does not mean that he is.  I have not checked the one source cited, but guess it is his military record card, a document that should exist for every soldier.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Fails WP:SOLDIER I'm afraid. Low ranking, awarded only the usual campaign medals. We could write an article like this one on every one of the 60,000 Australian servicemen of the Great War.   Hawkeye7   (discuss)  06:36, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Can't keep the article at least in its present form. Capitals00 (talk) 03:49, 14 September 2017 (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.