Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles 'Flip' Fairbanks


 * 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 -- JForget  23:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Charles &

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

This is an entertaining story, but it's a hoax. What it adds to the account in John Cabot of Cabot's 1497 voyage to North America is the alleged name of the man who was in the crow's nest at landfall, and a story about his nickname and his toes. I thought it unlikely that this sort of information had survived from the 15th Century, and a little research shows that it did not. Cabot's records have disappeared, and the only sources are second-hand - four letters which are available on the web and say nothing about Fairbanks and his toes. The book cited as a reference does not seem to exist; and the picture presented as a statue of Fairbanks is actually of a statue of Cabot. More detail, and the pictures side by side, on the article's talk page. JohnCD (talk) 21:13, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom, excellent research by JohnCD. ukexpat (talk) 21:27, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as hoax. -IcewedgЁ (ťalķ) 22:14, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete-- A rare case in which the article's discussion page is better than the article itself. It's too bad that we can't save JohnCD's work as a guide on spotting and neutralizing a hoax.   I'm especially impressed that JCD found the statue that was used to illustrate the story.  Mandm2008 had left his scent on articles like List of maritime explorers; kudos to User:Edward321 for reverting those.  Mandsford (talk) 00:19, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as hoax. Edward321 (talk) 00:21, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Good work. -FrankTobia (talk) 05:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Save The idea of looking at one website to determine 'truth' is outlandish. The scant details that are mentioned are done so because of Fairbanks condition. Had he not not overcome his diability he would have been forgotten like the rest of his crew. Savario Grimaldi (1957) "I Saw the Future" was published by "Ediesse" (Italy). The facts are taken from an original copy though I admit I am not a formal translator. The image was done in error and has been corrected. I needed to copy/paste code because I was having difficulty. I did commit an error but the fact that his face was not visible makes an assumption. What I find objectionable are your comments about his physical condition and the suggestion that this is a hoax because he had this condition? I think you should open your eyes and see the big picture - people with physical difficulties can make a difference. If Franklin D. Roosevelt can become President - why can't a sailor with a disability see North America? His eyes were fine. Mandm2008 (talk) 20:00, 27 June 2008 (UTC) — Mandm2008 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Comment It's not a case of using "only one web-site to determine 'truth'." I chose that one to quote from because it gives the clearest statement of the message you get wherever you look: the only contemporary records of the 1497 voyage are a few letters which go into little detail (and do not name any of the crew). In view of the great interest in establishing just where Cabot's voyage went I cannot believe that, if your 1957 Italian book is a reliable source giving the level of detail you quote, it would not have been picked up and quoted in papers such as this. Are you sure it is not a novel - fictional characters and events woven around Cabot's real voyage? JohnCD (talk) 14:37, 28 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to Save Let's clarify this "what level of detail" are you referring to? His name, or nick name and/or his ailment? I don't know. The site you point to refers to a hypothetical account, quote, "The hypothetical voyage advanced above is no more than an approximation to the truth, closer than which it may not be possible to come barring further documentary evidence." The book I am referring to is does not make any such commentary.


 * Delete - I would say "Per nom", but I disagree strongly with the assertion that this is an entertaining story. We have NOTHING verifiable here. Zero verifiable sources (after a reasonable search for evidence of the source claimed. If it isn't a hoax, the subject simply isn't notable. This crap-tacular veneer of outrage about marginalizing persons with disabilities makes me want to wheel over to the original editor and threaten hir with a good ole "oops, sorry to crush your toes like that". Yes, there have been people marginalized for various reasons: disabilities, race, gender identity, age, culture, etc. But this horse pucky about giving credit to the guy allegedly in the crow's nest is not that story. Seabound exploration typically gives credit for discoveries to the person heading the expedition. Remember Magellan being the first explorer to circumnavigate the Earth? Well, he died before he got all the way around. Now we have someone put up in the crow's nest by his captain and we're supposed to cheer for him because of his extra toes? If he existed and this is his story, delete the article anyway. I know we have virtually unlimited space and all, but we can always use the extra to pull the bushes out of the way to expose FDR's wheelchair or help more people see and hear the real heroics of Helen Keller (no, not the Miricle Worker crap). - Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Save The point is not about entertainment, you are taking the discussion off course. Fairbanks is notable.  What else does he need to do? He is the first to look and see the future - North America. Should only Columbus get credit for 2 continents? As far as your threats are concerned, I have nothing to say to that.  I see why so many people have entered this debate, it's fine to not discriminate against race or gender but when someone has a condition, that some people believe is humourous - they think its unacceptable.  Why must we continue to discuss his ailment, his family accepted him, Cabot accepted him, the crew accepted him and now today we have a person who wishes to cause others physical injury.  With regards to your  other points - why does the person heading the expedition need to get all or the the only credit? Someone had to be in the crow's nest, someone had to see land; Fairbanks should be included not because of his disabilty - he should be here because of his actions.  As for Helen Keller and FDR; I will reserve my comments except to say discrimination should not be tolerated.  It's a disgrace and all of you who agree with Mdsummermsw should be ashamed. Mandm2008 (talk) 21:12, 27 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mandm2008 (talk • contribs) 21:11, 27 June 2008 (UTC)  — Mandm2008 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete If not a hoax it seems to be unverifiable. I find it hard to believe that if the said reference exists it has the complete details asserted regarding this !person, his toe count and the derivation of his nickname. If I were to stretch AGF to the limit I might believe the book referenced was a hoax, but c'mon, 'his family accepted him, Cabot accepted him, the crew accepted him', this is all also contained in the book? All this aside, the key points missing from this article are verifiable, reliable sources. Mostly cloudy (talk) 22:34, 27 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to Save Please clarify "what level of detail" are you referring to? His name, or nick name and/or his ailment? I don't know. I did not make mention of his toe count. With regards to 'acceptance' this was not part of the article.  I made this comment when Mdsummermsw said some discriminating comments.  This was not contained in the book obviously.  Mandm2008 (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm afraid that you painted yourself into a corner when you said that the source was a book written in Italian, and that you were (not formally, of course) translating it (!!). So the title means "I saw the future", huh?  What was the original title?  Tell ya what, if you can copy a sentence or two about Flip Fairbanks from the Italian text, you'll have me convinced.  Online translation services won't deliver fluent Italian, but if you have the book in front of you... that won't be necessary, will it.  Buona suerte.  Mandsford (talk) 00:38, 29 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to Save I don't understand your train of thought and how 'I painted myself in a corner'. What I said is true I am not a formal translator but the title "Ho Visto il Futuro" doesn't take much translating. In fact, I can copy the paragraph where I find Fairbanks (Fayerbankes)in Italian and then translate to english.  But I don't want this to be a joke.  I feel everyone here believes this is a hoax and are feeding off of each other and not the actual article.   Mandm2008 (talk) 16:25, 2 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete it is not verifiable as put by the nominator and quite possibly a hoax. JBsupreme (talk) 05:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment to Save This is just an opinion/comment. My question is 'Do I have to be a formal translator to add to Wikipedia?'  Let's put his ailment, which I find superficial, but appearently quite humourous to young adults, on the backburner.  Is the Fairbanks notable?  This is what the discussion should be about.  No one other then Mdsummermsw has said otherwise.  Therefore when I translate the paragraph I want Fairbanks back up on Wikipedia where he should be.  Mandm2008 (talk) 16:26, 2 July 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.