Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frederick Charles Bothwell, Jr. (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 delete. Sam Walton (talk) 09:39, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Frederick Charles Bothwell, Jr.
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * There is very little evidence of satisfying Wikipedia's notability guidelines. Some of the references are unfortunately now dead links, but it is unlikely that they would offer much support for notability: for example, it is unlikely that a mere "Alphabetical Locator of Graduates and Former Cadets" contained substantial coverage of individual people included in the list; likewise, a source cited as a reference for the fact that he once received a posting as a second lieutenant is unlikely to provide much support for notability. Other than that, the references consist of a news announcement that he had been appointed as chief of a State Liquor Authority, a news announcement that he had offered "business management" a plan for the protection of industrial plants, and a very short obituary in the New York Times, which is far too short (six sentences) to be considered substantial coverage.


 * A previous AfD discussion was closed as "no consensus", but I am unconvinced that the "keep" arguments thee were sufficiently valid in terms of Wikipedia's policies to justify that closure, in light of the "delete" arguments, which were much more in line with policies. The "keep" arguments essentially fell into two types: (1) He did various things which were striking or significant, such as receiving two highly regarded medals, and at one time being the youngest colonel in the US Army Air Force. However, Wikipedia's notability standards require substantial coverage of such things, not the mere fact that they happened, and nobody produced evidence that they had received substantial coverage. (In any case, how remarkable is being the youngest colonel in a force? At any time someone or other is the youngest colonel, and as each youngest colonel gets older and newer colonels are appointed, over the years very many people must take a turn at being the youngest.) (2) It was suggested that the mere existence of an obituary in a prominent newspaper was said by one editor to be "sufficient for notability". However, that is not in line with Wikipedia's notability guidelines: substantial coverage is needed, not a mere six-sentence obituary, which is really pretty minimal. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:55, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 15:50, 9 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, doesn't really seem to meet WP:GNG. Coverage does not seem to be that significant. The NYT obit would be a big deal, if he were not a prior holder of a state-wide government job. A job that is not significant enough to confer notability. EricSerge (talk) 17:34, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; esp. the point about the obituary is well taken. Drmies (talk) 17:36, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete: Based on the claims in the article, he served well, but without the sorts of activities that generate news stories, and then he held a high state government post without generating any controversy before being a teacher. His dedication to serving others is admirable and should be honored, but there is nothing here to indicate that he will be a search term in an encyclopedia. Hithladaeus (talk) 17:45, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:SOLDIER.--Tomandjerry211 (Let's have a chat) 15:43, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:03, 12 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete as per above and non notability Heyyouoverthere (talk) 08:12, 17 June 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.