Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Charles de la Croix


 * 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. --Malcolmxl5 (talk) 23:08, 3 July 2009 (UTC)

Charles de la Croix

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

Fails WP:N Izzy007 Talk 12:21, 24 June 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep He's notable enough for an entry in the Catholic Encyclopedia. Edward321 (talk) 00:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 00:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Inclusion in a paper encyclopedia is in and of itself sufficient evidence of notability. No further investigation needs to be done to reach a keep conclusion.  The article would be better off if one or more editors did the historical research to cite sources other than that encyclopedia, however I'm sure they will have it done by the deadline.  GRBerry 00:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems to be a notable figure in the history of Missouri, Kansas, and early Osage-European contacts.  Information in other books includes these  --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:45, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Sufficient sources have been provided above to warrant inclusion. --ThaddeusB (talk) 01:05, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep if the Catholic encyclopaedia thinks him notable, so should WP. Peterkingiron (talk) 22:37, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. We have the capability of being at least as inclusive as any print encyclopedia, and have always done so. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:54, 2 July 2009 (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.