Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Henry R. Kenyon 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 redirect to their respective namesake ships.
 * Redirect Henry R. Kenyon Jr. to USS Henry R. Kenyon (DE-683)
 * Redirect John P. Gray to USS John P. Gray (APD-74)
 * Redirect Jeff Davis Woodson to USS Woodson
 * Redirect James C. Owens Jr. to USS James C. Owens
 * Redirect Ulvert M. Moore to USS Ulvert M. Moore (non-admin closure) ~ Ase1este charge-paritytime 21:28, 17 February 2021 (UTC)

Henry R. Kenyon Jr.

 * – ( View AfD View log )

As with numerous other people currently up for deletion, a Navy Cross and a ship named after one is not enough for a standalone article. Clarityfiend (talk) 00:02, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

I am also nominating the following related pages for the exactly same reasons (all members of the same ill-fated squadron, all awarded the Navy Cross and all with ships named after them):

A verdict for William W. Creamer was reached three days ago to merge to List of Navy Cross recipients for World War II. His namesake destroyer escort was launched, but not completed. George M. Campbell is in the same (uncompleted) boat as Creamer. His Afd is still open.
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:28, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


 * Redirect Henry R. Kenyon Jr. to USS Henry R. Kenyon (DE-683), John P. Gray to USS John P. Gray (APD-74), Jeff Davis Woodson to USS Woodson, James C. Owens Jr. to USS James C. Owens and Ulvert M. Moore to USS Ulvert M. Moore. All fail WP:SOLDIER (single award of Navy Cross, minor roles in Battle of Midway) and WP:GNG as they lack SIGCOV in multiple RS. MilHist consensus: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history is that being a ship namesake does not establish notability. Mztourist (talk) 03:48, 7 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect/merge to their respective namesake ships. -Indy beetle (talk) 21:35, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete all none of them are even close to meeting our notability guidelines for soldiers.John Pack Lambert (talk) 18:51, 10 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Redirect/merge Makes sense to have the namesake of the ship handled in the article about the ship if the namesake is not independently notable. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 18:09, 16 February 2021 (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.