Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evan Bruce-Gardyne


 * 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. ST47 (talk) 14:27, 1 July 2019 (UTC)

Evan Bruce-Gardyne

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The article makes the (unsourced) claim that "When junior officers were awarded the DSO it was an acknowledgement that the officer had only just missed out on receiving the Victoria Cross." I'm not buying it, and nothing else seems to support notability. Clarityfiend (talk) 08:46, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Scotland-related deletion discussions.  CASSIOPEIA(talk) 10:34, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Undecided . Mutt Lunker (talk) 12:08, 15 June 2019 (UTC)


 * I based the above on the statement that the DSO is typically awarded to officers ranked major (or equivalent) or higher, with awards to ranks below this usually for a high degree of gallantry, just short of deserving the Victoria Cross but having now checked the citation for that, it actually states that the order is generally given to officers in command, above the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel and awards to ranks below this are usually for a high degree of gallantry just short of deserving the Victoria Cross. The subject was a lieutenant commander at the time, equivalent to an army major and below a lieutenant colonel, so if the citation is correct rather than the DSO article, there may be validity to this article's claim about Bruce-Gardyne. Not sure that that alone is enough to establish notability though. Mutt Lunker (talk) 13:00, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * (In case it's unlcear, the above relates solely to the potential veracity and notability of having "just missed out on receiving the Victoria Cross".) Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)


 * Comment a single DSO for gallantry (generally awarded to junior officers, as awards to higher grade officers were usually for distinguished service) doesn't meet WP:SOLDIER, and neither does the rank of captain in the navy. No comment on coverage per GNG, but it seems pretty sparse. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:27, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Thanks; so back to delete then. Mutt Lunker (talk) 09:39, 16 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Comment. A lieutenant-commander is not a junior officer, so is a perfectly normal rank to be awarded a DSO. In actual fact, the DSO when awarded to junior officers (i.e. below major, lieutenant-commander and squadron leader) was usually used as a second-level gallantry decoration, as there was no other second-level decoration available to officers. It is indeed received wisdom that this was an acknowledgement that the officer had just missed out on the VC, but in fact so many were awarded to junior officers that I suspect that this is merely an urban legend. For example, every surviving commissioned aircraft captain of the Dambusters raid was awarded the DSO; every surviving non-commissioned captain was awarded the CGM, the RAF's second-level gallantry decoration for other ranks. When awarded to more senior officers, the DSO was (and is) usually instead awarded for inspired leadership. -- Necrothesp (talk) 09:21, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * To note, the source refers to it being an award for "a high degree of gallantry (etc.)" for those not "above the rank of Lieutenant-Colonel", rather than "junior officers". If correct, it would then pertain to the subject. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:42, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid that source is incorrect. The Wikipedia article on the DSO is accurate. Many majors and lieutenant-colonels (and equivalents) have been awarded the DSO for leadership instead of gallantry. In fact, lieutenant-colonel is almost certainly the commonest rank for the award (see here). But it's irrelevant anyway, given a single second-level gallantry award is not sufficient to meet WP:SOLDIER. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:56, 18 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment looking at the article it seems aside from the military career most of this is about who Evan Bruce-Gardyne was related to, which is of course not evidence if notability. If it is felt he does not meet WP:SOLDIER (and I am not convinced that he does) then I do not think that he meets any other standard of notability. If it is decided that he meets WP:SOLDIER and the article is retained, I think there needs to be editing to cut back on the family material. For instance I fail to see why it is relevant to state that "Joan Bruce-Gardyne is a Patroness of the Royal Caledonian Ball" and does the section for his son Jock Bruce-Gardyne really need to state his cause of death (which is of course covered in his own article)? To me this looks like padding. Dunarc (talk) 22:41, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 16:57, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Reads like a family history but makes no real claim of notability. Mackensen (talk) 04:43, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:GNG. He's close to meeting SOLDIER - however his service as a Captain was at shore (in 1917 at Zeebrugge he was a Lt. Cdr) - superintendent at the Royal Hospital School (Navy List) - I don't see any indication he commanded a ship or formation in battle at this rank. In Zeebrugge - he was outranked by several other officers (the DSO was awarded to 5 officers in the action - 2 Capts, 2 Cdrs, and our subject - ). I don't think be a Laird confers notability. So we're left with evaluating GNG. The sources in the article do not establish GNG, and from what I see in outside sources - it is mention of the medal, mention of the courtmartial in Jutrland, mention in the context of his MP son - but nothing in-depth on our individual - what convinced me is the paucity of hits (and any in-depth coverage) of Bruce-Gardyne+Jutland+Zeebrugge - which I'd expect to show up in any detailed bio of our subject here. Icewhiz (talk) 09:22, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Note the text of missing out on the VC (and possibly other text) may be coming from this source (though they might've copied it from us) - clanmacfarlanegenealogy.info. Icewhiz (talk) 09:26, 1 July 2019 (UTC)
 * It attributes this Wikipedia article as its source. Mutt Lunker (talk) 10:46, 1 July 2019 (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.