Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hamilton Moses Jr


 * 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. Jaranda wat's sup 20:16, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Hamilton Moses Jr

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Bio does not satisfy WP:N Gilliam 11:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOT. JulesH 11:53, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I'm quite aware that I may have a COI because I create the article but I was viewing this page which is a reference linked to by this article, I'm aware of WP:ILIKEIT but it is referenced and its not a memorial. Rlest 12:48, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * to nominator: WP:NN states an article is notable if it has been the subject of reliable third party sources, if you look at the references it clearly meets these standards. Rlest 12:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Those references are to obituary listings. Wikipedia is not a memorial and should not have articles on everyone whose death is covered by 2 outlets Corpx 17:20, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * You'll note that it requires substantial coverage. --Eyrian 22:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep Sources look good, notability ascertained. All good. Pedro | Chat  13:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Brief investigation finds some links but not much. Add more information can be found on his role with the blue ribbon committee as mentioned and my vote would be stronger. Nicko (Talk•Contribs) 13:27, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, sources look good and he seems notable enough. Bart133 (t) (c) 16:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete having a mention in a newspaper because you have died does not make you notable. NobutoraTakeda 16:32, 17 July 2007 (UTC) This user has been banned.
 * This user joined Wikipedia two days ago and has made several AfD contributions within very short spaces of time, indicating that they are not actualy reading the article, plus the article does not mention that he appeared in a newspaper. Rlest 16:58, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment on the user's argument, not the user.  You're speculating way too much about what the user does or does not do.   Corpx 17:01, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * http://www.law.harvard.edu/alumni/bulletin/2001/spring/memoriam_main.html That looks like the same as anything I've ever found in a news paper section for death notices. NobutoraTakeda 18:08, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - What exactly is this guy's claim for notability? Find articles says that he was "assigned commander of the U.S. naval base in Southhampton, England, during the invasion of Normandy.". Wiki article says "he was given the position of Commander of the US throughout the Invasion of Normandy." - I dont think being the commander of a naval base during WW is sufficient to be notable Corpx 16:34, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, He is notable. Callelinea 17:17, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * For? Battle of Normandy doesn't even mention this person Corpx 17:18, 17 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - just some lawyer with the kind of credentials you'd expect for having lived that long. Gordonofcartoon 20:04, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - would keep if his work with charities/bankruptcies can be expanded and sourced. Seems to be his most important professional contributions as a lawyer. Wl219 22:00, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - obituaries do not satisfy the requirement for substantial coverage. --Eyrian 22:37, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Although the article says "he was given the position of Commander of the US throughout the Invasion of Normandy" which would have made him the superior not only of General Dwight D. Eisenhower but the superior of President Franklin D. Roosevelt as well, the article lacks references to show it is more than a memorial article for a man who served his country in war, had a successful business career, and did good things for churches. The world could use a few billion more people like him, but nothing shows he satisfies WP:BIO. To have an article, he should have had substantial coverage in multiple independent reliable publications, which is not satisfied by a couple of obituaries. The article is a memorial, and per WP:NOT, "Wikipedia is not a memorial." Edison 23:49, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
 * comment From the references used for that part of the article (the obit in the Chicago Sun-Times), he was commander of the US navy base at Southampton during the invasion, which is more likely. But in that case he would have been a high ranking officer and there should be sources. He had a probably more notable father, and also son, the III. which doesn't help in finding materials. BTW, the obit seems to be a real obit, not a family announcement, and such obits in reputable papers are very much RSs. There was also a obit in the Chicago Tribune.  So far I just have the headline "Hamilton Moses Jr., Member of Panel That Crafted Bankruptcy Code, Passes Away" Pre web, which of course makes things difficult. He may be important, and this may be sourceable.
 * Can someone help me with this on on Lexis? DGG (talk) 01:23, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

*Delete I've read the article three times, without spotting a real claim to notability. Because that's the only thing that makes sense to me, I've assumed the word "a" is missing in the sentence describing him as "Commander" of the US. If I'm wrong, explanation is needed in the article and I amend my opinion to Speedy Keep. I'll ask our local library-hanger if she can find any more about this. --Dweller 18:04, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * As stated above the notability guideline states that an article is notable if it has been the subject of reliable third part sources, which it has. Rlest 18:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * So, do obituaries count? Does that mean that everyone who has had an obituary is notable and deserves an entry? --Eyrian 18:16, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
 * obits vary. people having staff-written obits in major metropolitan papers are generally notable, and the obits in such papers are RSs. Whether these two obits count is unclear, but they are not the family-written puff pieces used unjustifiably in many local history articles. DGG (talk) 00:18, 19 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep. He's clearly notable. Watch the amends I'm about to make. --Dweller 07:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * I think it should be a red flag if the only source about a person is the person's obituary, which are known to embellish accomplishments to portray the deceased in a more positive light.
 * "Mr. Moses helped revise bankruptcy laws as part of the Blue Ribbon Panel." - How exactly did he help revise the laws?
 * "He was "assigned commander of the U.S. naval base in Southhampton, England, during the invasion of Normandy." - That's great, but I dont think being commander of a base by itself is notable unless he was involved in a major battle or did something else notable. Corpx 14:00, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Re obituaries - that may be your opinion, but both sources fulfil our requirements for WP:RS and the guideline makes no exceptions for obituaries. Re bankruptcy rules - you're arguing that the article is weak. Undeniable. Not an argument for deletion. Re base commander, I agree. --Dweller 14:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
 * There is nothing else that talks about his contributions to the bankruptcy laws, which leads me to believe that his contributions were minuscule, and thus not notable Corpx 01:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but that argument is your opinion and is OR. --Dweller 17:13, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Incorrect, that is a matter of burden of proof. Unless his contributions are shown to be significant, it is assumed they are not. --Eyrian 17:20, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep per amendments made by Dweller and the DYK possibilities this subject possesses. Burntsauce 17:26, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment "Mr. Moses helped revise bankruptcy laws as part of the Blue Ribbon Panel" - what precisely does this mean? There is no "the Blue Ribbon Panel". A Blue Ribbon Panel is a generic for a form of expert lay committee that could be convened at any level: federal, state, city, local library... Gordonofcartoon 19:31, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * See the second paragraph, the laws were obviously seen as controvrsial. Rlest  20:27, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
 * That may be, but nobody knows the extent of his contributions.  All we know is that he served on a committee of experts and that's it.   He was not even a legislator Corpx 21:05, 20 July 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - falls woefully short of notability criteria. Served in WWII without particular distinction (like millions of others), was a lawyer (like millions of others), gave money to charity (like millions of others)... well, you get the point. Yes, he served on a (not "the") Blue Ribbon Panel, but it's not like this was the Warren Commission -- it dealt with bankruptcy law reform, not exactly a notable topic either unless his contributions to the endeavour were of particular significance (and the article makes no claim they were). Without prejudice to the hallowed memory of the late Mr. Moses, let's spike this one based on WP:BIO and WP:N. Biruitorul 04:13, 22 July 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete if he was in charge of a military base, there would be some sort of military record of such command posting. I have been completely unable to find one in any of the relevant historical databases, and any hits on a .mil site. His position of bankrupcy law authority seems to also have exceedingly weak sourcing, as such I would push that he does fail WP:BIO and notability standards.  ALKIVAR &trade; &#x2622; 05:46, 22 July 2007 (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.