Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Denniss


 * 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. ‑Scottywong | communicate _ 17:14, 29 April 2017 (UTC)

Gary Denniss

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A local historian and teacher with no special claim to notability. The three refs provide no evidence of notability. They show he exists and has written some books about local history but no evidence of any notability. Fails WP:GNG  Velella  Velella Talk 22:22, 12 April 2017 (UTC)  Velella  Velella Talk  22:22, 12 April 2017 (UTC)|pg=Gary Denniss}}

1. Lieutenant Governor's Ontario Heritage Award for Lifetime Achievement, presented by Lt. Gov. David C. Onley, Feb. 21, 2013. 2. Author of 39 books on the history of Muskoka. Katsheron (talk) 22:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This article's subject has sufficient nobility for the following reasons:
 * Keep, at this time: I am going to look at this from a very narrow point of view, concerning WP:policies and guidelines, that include using historical books and considering Notability (geographic features), Geographic imbalance, and Notability (geography), that will add to regional and state prominence, so giving notability to the author. Historical books are important to society, and we can't have a national history without the foundation of local history. 38 books, especially if not self-published, is more than trivial historical prominence, and if we don't consider this important we might as well get rid of all local places such as lighthouses or town historical interests. Because a reference is not "listed" does not mean it does not exist. Regional coverage is acceptable as notability and one book on Texas Rangers would be regional as well as state significance. I have found evidence that some of the books are listed at several libraries, not just in one county, so I am inclined to lean towards regional and state notability. The author wrote an encyclopedia of history that expands coverage to more than just a single town or even county before he died. Note: Angelina Co. historian and author Bob Bowman dies at 77 With such regional and state notability an author with 38 historical books would be notable for Wikipedia inclusion. I do plan to look at the article, as well as sources, for article expansion as well as linking to other relevant articles. Otr500 (talk) 11:05, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ontario-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 05:32, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  J 947 (c)  00:09, 20 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject fails WP:GNG, WP:PROF, and WP:NAUTHOR. Any argument otherwise is based in folly. Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 17:54, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Subject passes WP:NAUTHOR on items 1, 3 and 4, and passes WP:GNG in ref's and reviews. Katsheron (talk) 19:23, 21 April 2017 (UTC)
 * At best weak keep, probably delete. If he were not so prolific I would certainly say Delete.  Most local historians are NN.  Peterkingiron (talk) 13:48, 22 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep A well referenced article. Subject is renown in his area and has influenced the popularity of Muskoka to its present coveted vacation destination status.AaronBC86 (talk) 02:11, 26 April 2017 (UTC)
 * — AaronBC86 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.


 * Delete. This is written like a résumé, not an encyclopedia article, and is referenced far too strongly to local community weekly newspapers in his own local area with no evidence of sufficient coverage in reliable sources — the only newspaper reference here that goes beyond local coverage in Bracebridge/Huntsville is the paid-inclusion obituary of his daughter in the Barrie Examiner, which is not a notability assisting source. And the significant number of references here which amount to "cited in other non-notable author's work" don't assist notability either, because Denniss is not the subject of those citations. The Lieutenant Governor's Heritage Award is also not an automatic inclusion freebie that exempts a person from having to be referenced much better than this — as witness the fact that the article creator had to create the winners category for it, because nobody else who's won it has an article on that basis alone. There simply is not the depth or breadth of reliable sourcing here that would be required to get a person of primarily local notability into an international encyclopedia. Bearcat (talk) 15:15, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I am at a loss as to why Wikipedia could keep an article like this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kokuhaku_(album) and not the one for Gary Denniss. Katsheron (talk) 16:56, 27 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. For one thing, that album does appear to satisfy our notability standards for WP:NALBUMS, by having charted in the top ten in a country's national record charts — yes, the article needs to be better than it is before it can be considered a good article, but it does have a valid notability claim for what it is. That's in no way comparable to the question of whether a writer has a valid notability claim, or the depth and breadth of reliable sourcing to support it, under WP:AUTHOR; each topic has to be evaluated on its own standalone merits, and there's no such thing as "if that thing has an article then this one automatically has to have one too", especially if you're comparing two topics that don't even belong to the same class of thing. That's not even comparing apples to oranges, which at least are both fruit; it's comparing apples to antelopes. Bearcat (talk) 17:14, 27 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Weak Delete - while there is some coverage out there, it does not rise to the level of significant, in-depth sourcing necessary to show they pass WP:GNG. With a high citation count of 3, they clearly don't pass WP:SCHOLAR, and I can see nothing to show they pass WP:NAUTHOR.  Onel 5969  TT me 22:40, 28 April 2017 (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.