Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hugh Boyd Casey


 * 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 keep. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:16, 17 December 2017 (UTC)

Hugh Boyd Casey

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:NOTINHERITED. Being related to generals and having an installation named in your honor isn't enough. Clarityfiend (talk) 21:20, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 21:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Merry Christmas! Baby miss  fortune 21:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - Casey's death was well covered, and there are plenty of results about it in reliable newspapers on newspapers.com. His activities in WWII are briefly covered in articles about his father from that period. As such, the article seems to me to well satisfy WP:V and WP:NOR. In order to satisfy WP:NPOV/WP:N, multiple reliable sources are necessary. I feel that period newspapers can satisfy WP:RS and give an article enough to satisfy our policies and guidelines. Further, looking at google books searches, I find some coverage, largely related to the camp and certainly enough to satisfy V/RS/OR concerns. I considered a !vote to redirect to Camp Casey, but the coverage is actually related to three things, the camp, the general, and the Hugh Boyd Casey memorial award which, I think, is still awarded to an NCO every year in the 7th infantry regiment and was, I think, founded as a part of the will of Hugh's mother. Smmurphy(Talk) 23:50, 10 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I've expanded the article using a nine newspapers.com articles. Four of the articles are from during his life, one of which is about his father the rest are about him. Two are obits. One is about the naming of the camp. And two are references to the memorial award (there are more references to the memorial award, each one giving slightly different accounts of the award, so I added two so the reader can get a sense of the variation in the wordings around the award). Links to the newspaper clippings are in the article. Smmurphy(Talk) 16:34, 12 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - The guy was awarded the Distinguished Service Cross and had a base named in his honor. If he'd been awarded the medal twice he'd meet WP:SOLDIER and we wouldn't be having this conversation.  However, there are fewer bases named after soldiers than there are awardees of the DSC, so it seems reasonable to count the naming as a higher honor than the medal, thus keep.192.160.216.52 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 15:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. North America1000 20:31, 11 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Per recent improvements. Having a military installation (or ship) and award named after you is a sign of notability. Notability is not inherited, indeed, however coverage may be bestowed on the relatives of more notable individuals (which is partially the case here) and soldiers may be notable also when not presumed notable per SOLDIER.Icewhiz (talk) 17:01, 12 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Having a major military base named after him takes him over the the line. I admit that the criteria for this sort of honour is maddeningly random. Has attracted significant coverage.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:53, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Major cultural and military relevance in the USA. Ventric (talk) 20:07, 16 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per above and after improvements is notable has a   military base named after him.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 04:36, 17 December 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.