Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David Crawford (colonel)


 * 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. JForget 23:23, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

David Crawford (colonel)

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

Nominating as I feel doesn't pass WP:POLITICIAN. The House of Burgesses did qualify at times as a first-level sub-national political office, but at the time of Crawford's election to it (1692), it's influence was severely limited (quoted below) (according it's own article)

"In 1624, the Virginia Company lost its charter, and Virginia became a royal colony. As a Royal Colony, the House of Burgesses consisted of two members from every county in Virginia and one member from each of the following: the City of Williamsburg, the City of Jamestown, the City of Norfolk, and the College of William and Mary. The House of Burgesses continued to meet, but its influence was severely restricted. Despite limitations on its actions..."

This situation appears to continue until it's dissolution in 1769.

I would argue that this means that Crawford was not elected to a first-level sub-national political office. Fol de rol troll (talk) 17:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep -- sourcing could be better, but I'm not sure why nominator feels that the House of Burgesses lost its status in 1624; it was still the foremost political office in Virginia, as far as I can tell from the description here, until its dissolution in the mid-1700s. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 18:12, 3 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The fact the office was less power than it had been does not mean it ceased to be a first-level sub-national political office. Edward321 (talk) 14:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget  23:51, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep: Definitely passed WP:NOTABILITY and can't imagine why the status of the House of Burgesses after Crawford's death has anything to do with WP:POLITICIAN. Billbowery (talk) 05:37, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. He was elected to the House of Burgesses in 1692, which was after the diminishment in power of the House. That was my point. Fol de rol troll (talk) 17:28, 10 August 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.