Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Harry Rosman


 * 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 The Purple Gang. Content may be merged at editorial discretion. T. Canens (talk) 15:07, 25 June 2016 (UTC)

Harry Rosman

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Contested prod. WP:BLP1E - a witness in The Purple Gang's trial. No sources with any other information, no GHits of value. Not a potential redirect because the subject doesn't appear in the Purple Gang article. MSJapan (talk) 04:29, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge then redirect to The_Purple_Gang. Yes, he's not mentioned there right now. That's what the merge if for. ~Kvng (talk) 05:22, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I have left a pointer to this discussion at Talk:The Purple Gang. I strongly believe that this should be a required step whenever anyone proposes a merge at an AfD. Otherwise, the likely result is that the editors of the target article object to the merge, undo it, and we are left with an impasse between a consensus here and a conflicting consensus there. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:44, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * That seems eminently sensible to me. Is there a discussion or guideline on these lines? Thincat (talk) 10:50, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I suppose that's right from where we stand now but the proper way to avoid such a mess in the first place is to consider a merge WP:BEFORE nominating. ~Kvng (talk) 16:08, 13 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Well, I agree with that as well. There's far too much stuff gets nominated here that ought to be discussed on talk pages. Thincat (talk) 09:47, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge to The Purple Gang § Cleaners and Dyers War, which will improve that article. North America1000 14:02, 14 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Crime-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 02:22, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Businesspeople-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 09:50, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Mention at the other article however amount needed as that would suffice, Delete and then Redirect as there's nothing particularly suggesting keeping this if there are no future signs of better and thus can be deleted if any necessary contents are simply moved. SwisterTwister   talk  17:24, 17 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment – If the article is deleted and redirected, a mention of the subject at the merge target may never actually be performed, because users wouldn't be able to access the content of this article. North America1000 18:15, 17 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply - In the grand historical scheme of things, this guy was one witness in a trial. That's his entire claim to fame, and he gets a trivial mention on one page in every book on the Purple Gang, and that's it .  I really don't think the quality of the encyclopedia or the target article is going to be terribly affected if he's not included, considering we're not even covering the larger event that the subject is a part of.  He's just one of many people involved.  Just because he exists doesn't mean he needs to be linked to an article subsection where only his name is (not yet) mentioned along with six other people.MSJapan (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2016 (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.