Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Ingram McMorran (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Michig (talk) 09:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)

John Ingram McMorran
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable old guy. He lived hard, he died... and yeah, that's it. This has only routine coverage mixed in with some especially outlandish puffery. WP:NOPAGE. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 16:30, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:07, 16 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 19:08, 16 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per NOPAGE. Can someone verify what a fortune teller incorrectly predicted 100 years ago? Give me a break. Legacypac (talk) 11:35, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator....William, is the complaint department really on the roof? 12:31, 17 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This article blatantly fails WP:GNG, WP:BIO1E, WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:NOPAGE. There is no policy that the "oldest x" is notable and this article is packed with longevity fancruft like a supposed soothsayers age prediction and he had a politician cousin. Newshunter12 (talk) 04:25, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete when the lead inserts that a person's cousin was a member of congress, the subject of the article itself is just plain almost certainly non-notable. Unless we can find contemporary sourcing on what the fortune teller said, this is just plain undocumeted folk lore.John Pack Lambert (talk) 00:23, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Redirect to List of the verified oldest men, where he ranks 12th worldwide. — JFG talk 09:21, 19 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, to reach the age this man did is far more notable than simply being old. If there isn't yet a "policy that the 'oldest x' is notable" 'create and enforce one immediately!! LE (talk) 18:12, 20 November 2018 (UTC)
 * There is no notability guideline or policy that the "oldest x" is notable or entitled to an article. Your exuberant demand for such a policy and your edit summary of "Stop assaulting coverage of the AMAZINGLY old!" gives your argument away as weightless WP:ILIKEIT. Newshunter12 (talk) 04:54, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
 * LE, this article is meant to be about him but it tells us more about his family. What is there to keep once the padded family trivia and (unsourced) fortune teller story are removed? CommanderLinx (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep I don't think living more than 100 years is something routine, i is notable. Alex-h (talk) 09:21, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not routine, but the sparse coverage of it certainly is. Newshunter12 sums up the policy argument well, I won't repeat it. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 16:11, 23 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete then redirect. Living past 100 isn't that special. See Acciaroli which says "In 2016, scientists studied the town because of its unusually high number of centenarians, some 300, with 20 percent of those reaching the age of 110." Morgan Ginsberg (talk) 01:06, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:NOPAGE and WP:PERMASTUB. This article tells us more about his family than it does about him and there's that ridiculous (and most likely unsourced) story about a fortune teller. There is nothing to say about this man other than he was born, had a family, got old and then died. CommanderLinx (talk) 00:32, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete This is almost a similar case i saw with articles being created for Titanic survivors that eventually died. I think there's no way they meet notability just because they lived 100+ years and also because they died on titanic. PlotHelpful (talk) 13:53, 29 November 2018 (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.