Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Francis Barber Ogden (2nd nomination)


 * 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) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:12, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Francis Barber Ogden
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

May fail Wikipedia's general notability guidelines. SarahStierch (talk) 06:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete: All we have here is a replay of text interpreted from a tombstone inscription. The consular role that it mentions would not I think meet WP:DIPLOMAT even in the context of its time. The tomb monument is a Grade II listed building: but this is not enough for the subject to inherit any notability, and multiple searches are failing to turn up anything substantial. AllyD (talk) 08:31, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 *  Delete  Nothing about the individual suggests notability: consuls aren't automatically notable, and the Society of Cincinnati was open to any American Revolutionary War officer and some of their descendents so it doesn't indicate significant achievement. Can't find additional references other than a genealogical database. Previous AfD saw no arguments for keeping, but failed to get enough responses for consensus to be demonstrated. --Colapeninsula (talk) 13:07, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bilateral relations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 18 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep The previous votes are a fair reflection of the article as it was until my recent edits - however, the subject does seem to be notable, but for reasons which were previously completely unmentioned in the article. I have added the most certain of these, but there are other possible ones if someone can sort out the more reliable sources from the less reliable ones. There are a number of strong claims made about him - as an inventor, as a pioneer of steamboats on the Ohio and Mississippi, and so on - but each of these, while supported in some sources, seems to be explicitly or implicitly denied in others. In particular, he seems to have obtained a large number of patents, but it is unclear how many of these were for his own inventions; or for things that he invented independently of but later than the original inventor; or were basically for someone else's invention (whether by agreement with the actual inventor, as with John Ericsson, or not). On matters where there may be less disagreement, but I didn't find any source with which I was entirely happy - he certainly seems to have been an aide-de-camp to Andrew Jackson at the Battle of New Orleans and involved, as an innovating businessman if not an inventor, with the development of water (and possibly rail) transport in the old Northwest. He may also have been in New Orleans, possibly as an engineer, for a while in the 1820s - there are a few indications that he may have been dealing with drainage questions, and there is a map of New Orleans that seems to be by him. And finally, by the way, searches seem to go far better with than with using his full name. PWilkinson (talk) 22:30, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:25, 24 December 2013 (UTC)




 * Keep User:PWilkinson did a great job expanding this article to show notability. User:Colapeninsula, User:SarahStierch, will you reconsider? Q VVERTYVS (hm?) 16:36, 24 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Excellent work. I'm happy to change my !vote. --Colapeninsula (talk) 20:08, 24 December 2013 (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.