Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eric Davidson (survivor)


 * 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   no consensus.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 17:25, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Eric Davidson (survivor)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Does not pass either the general notability guide or WP:Notability (people). A person does not generally gain notability by being the last of a group to die. LK (talk) 05:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete In fact, he's not even the last one to die after surviving the explosion. Many people were injured during this accident, none of them have an article devoted to them.
 * Keep Clearly passes the general notability guide by being the subject of multiple detailed and independent works. The reason that these works covered the subject is quite irrelevant - the point is that external authors and editors have found this topic worthy of note and therefore so should we.  For example, one of the sources supplied tells us that he was the subject of a National Film Board documentary &mdash; "One of the Boys". Warden (talk) 13:04, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - This seems a pretty clear case of a One Event biography — a child who was in the wrong place at the wrong time and tragically blinded eventually dies. Both more or less random events with no connection other than things that happened to one person. That's essentially a start and finish to a biography — all that is missing is the content. Was this a member of Parliament? The inventor of the toaster-oven? A leading expert on provincial birds? The chief executive of a department store chain? Where's the "notability hook"??? Carrite (talk) 16:05, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The WP:GNG explains that "Determining notability does not necessarily depend on things like fame, importance, or popularity...". So, you don't have to be a chief executive or member of parliament.  What matters is whether you are the subject of independent interest.  In this case, the person was blind but made a career as a motor mechanic.  That seems quite remarkable so, if we needed a hook, there it is.  But this is AfD, not DYK.  Hooks are not needed for articles, just sources.  BLP1E is not especially relevant because the person is dead but, in any case, that would be an argument for merger with the article about the original disaster, not deletion. Warden (talk) 17:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – There's enough reliable sources that address this historical topic in detail to qualify inclusion in Wikipedia. Also passes WP:BASIC.
 * Sources below, from :
 * ,, . There's more paywalled sources that appear to address the topic per the search criterion above , , and others.
 * — Northamerica1000 (talk) 21:51, 23 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 01:53, 24 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep per Colonel Warden. By the way, who's the last survivor with injuries? 117Avenue (talk) 21:38, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Significant coverage in reliable sources has been found.  D r e a m Focus  00:45, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Multiple sources and notable individual. Notable coverage and interviews with Davidson span several decades. As per above discussions. Scanlan (talk) 02:17, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to Halifax Explosion. All you "keepers" seem to overlook WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E. Aside from surviving the explosion, he has no other claim to notability. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 20:39, 30 December 2011 (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.