Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Greenbury Ridgely Henry


 * 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   redirect to Phi Alpha Literary Society. Feel free to merge any usable content from the page history. T. Canens (talk) 19:32, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Greenbury Ridgely Henry

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete due to lack of notability demonstrated through significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Claim of notability is due to being a founder of Phi Alpha Literary Society. The sole reference is a catalog distributed by the Society, which is not considered significant or independent.  Cind. amuse  02:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 03:31, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

Keep This man took part in a significant event in history, and I have now gathered five different printed sources that confirm this. John Milito (talk) 03:31, 27 January 2011 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:36, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. None of the references provided equates to significant coverage. They merely include his name in a list among others, or in a genealogical record. Honestly, considering the founding of a club or society as significant or notable is subjective. Regardless, taking part in a significant event of this nature does not establish notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage in reliable, independent sources.  Cind. amuse  19:22, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Comment. WP:BIO states: "If the event is highly significant, and the individual's role within it is a large one, a separate article is generally appropriate." This man founded a society. This society is "highly significant" for several reasons, two of which follow. This organization counts among its members Abraham Lincoln, due to his presentation of a speech on request of the society. In addition, this organization won one of the first intercollegiate debates in the country.John Milito (talk) 05:21, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. This article now has a total of 7 sources, two of which are articles with this man as the main subject. John Milito (talk) 17:45, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Borderline delete In addition to being one of the founders of the literary society (which does not qualify him as notable IMO), he was also one of the founders of the Iowa State Medical Society, and as such he rates a paragraph in an article about the history of medicine in Iowa and in a book "The physicians and surgeons of the United States" . This is not much documentation, but it may be all that can be expected given the time frame. However, I am not convinced that these achievements add up to personal notability. --MelanieN (talk) 18:16, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * P.S. This article is part of a WP:Walled garden of articles about the Phi Alpha Literary Society, and IMO the separate articles about the founders should be deleted unless they are shown to be notable for something else. Their mention in the primary article is enough. --MelanieN (talk) 18:29, 10 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to Phi Alpha Literary Society The article cites several sources about Greenbury Ridgely Henry that verify the information in the article. Per WP:PRESERVE, a merge/redirect to the society he co-founded is not unreasonable. has spent much of his time working on these articles. It would be a shame to delete wholesale his hard work. I concur that most of these subjects do not pass Notability; however, there is no reason not to place several sentences from each of these articles into Phi Alpha Literary Society. Cunard (talk) 23:39, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I would have no problem with a redirect/merge as suggested by Cunard. --MelanieN (talk) 01:48, 12 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep or Merge. Just about enough other stuff in WP:RS to be WP:N - but it's borderline. NBeale (talk) 16:17, 13 February 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.