Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Brodhead III


 * 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. (non-admin closure) clpo13(talk) 09:48, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Daniel Brodhead III

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article has not been sourced for three years and google does not seem to be very talkative on the subject, leaving doubts on the reality of the issue Rinko87 (talk) 22:20, 17 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep - The lack of in-article sourcing is not sufficient reason to delete, and Google Books indicates that the article is correct (for instance in History of Cornelis Maessen Van Buren and The Stroudsburgs in the Poconos), though many books' content is unavailable. From the available book-sourced info, it's marginal whether it should remain an article rather than being merged to Stroudsburg, Pennsylvania and Daniel Brodhead IV. What tipped it in favour of a keep vote is this more comprehensive article, which, although not listing its sources, would have been created from reliable sources -- though possibly primary/offline in nature. undefinedHydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)  16:33, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pennsylvania-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 18 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Daniel Brodhead IV per nom. Being the first white person to settle in a small town isn't a suitable claim of notability. The sparse sourcing doesn't pass WP:GNG. The short content here is better represented in the son's article. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 17:37, 18 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Changing to Keep I'll accept subject meets a very broad interpretation of GNG based on Mr. Norton's addition of citations., what do you think of the new material? Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 19:29, 30 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Daniel Brodhead IV, being the first Euro-American to settle in a particular locality, and being a local judge, are not enough to demonstrate notability.John Pack Lambert (talk) 19:05, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment -- This does not accord with the article on Stroudsburg. Furthermore being the grantee of 600 acres (about one square mile is hardly notable.  Possibly limited merge to his son and to Stroudburg, perhaps adding one sentence to each.  Peterkingiron (talk) 16:31, 20 December 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, clpo13(talk) 08:09, 25 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep There is enough information to have a stand alone article since I expanded it. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:13, 26 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep with kudos to RAN for adding the material and sources that put this well past the minimum Wikipedia standards of notability. Alansohn (talk) 18:56, 30 December 2015 (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.