Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Means (politician)


 * 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. Consensus is that there is enough non-political coverage to meet GNG, and a failure to meet WP:NPOL is irrelevant. (non-admin closure) power~enwiki ( π, ν ) 00:15, 6 July 2018 (UTC)

John Means (politician)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

small-town mayor, fails WP:POLITICIAN. Sourced only to a local history book and two unreliable sources. Rusf10 (talk) 03:45, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Kentucky-related deletion discussions.  MT Train Talk 05:43, 14 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep - I've updated the rootsweb source to a google books version (Johnson, E. Polk. A History of Kentucky and Kentuckians: The Leaders and Representative Men in Commerce, Industry and Modern Activities. Vol. 3. Lewis Publishing Company, 1912. p1170-1174). I think this is one of the "two unreliable sources", but I think it is actually quite reliable and suggests this individual satisfies ANYBIO. Looking at that entry, Means seems to me to be a suitable subject for an encyclopedia article. Smmurphy(Talk) 17:36, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * My mistake, seeing that the original reference was a link to ancestory.com and the link no longer works, I assumed the source was jsut a website and not a book. Even, so I do not see how he passes ANYBIO. He is known for being a politician, so WP:POLITICIAN applies. But even taking the text from the footnote of anybio #2 "Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians." I am not okay with using "A History of Ashland, Kentucky 1786 - 1954" to meet that requirement. Anyone can write a book about their hometown and sell a few hundred copies, it does not make people mentioned in that book notable. So taking away the local book, we're left with exactly one rs, which is not enough to establish notability.--Rusf10 (talk) 18:29, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of ANYBIO #3, although I should have been more forthright that a state encyclopedia in the cyclopedia era is a weak argument for ANYBIO#3. I still think the subject is suitable for an entry on those grounds, but I'll take a look at other sources over the next week, if I can. Smmurphy(Talk) 19:07, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * NB: I've updated the page somewhat with a number of sources, including an entry in: Hall, Henry. America's Successful Men of Affairs: The United States at large New York Tribune, 1896, p551-552 Smmurphy(Talk) 20:28, 21 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets GNG, already has a biography in a reference book. --RAN (talk) 20:47, 15 June 2018 (UTC) !vote by blocked editor--Rusf10 (talk) 16:07, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * No, it doesn't. GNG requires multiple sources, not one source. And we're certainly not counting the "History of Ashland, Kentucky" book as a source to establish notability.--Rusf10 (talk) 21:03, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment. Editor raises a valid point and was not blocked when he expressed his opinion. gidonb (talk) 16:18, 17 June 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete First, he fails WP:NPOL. He's primarily notable for helping found and being the mayor for a small town in Kentucky. While he does have several pages in a reference biography dedicated to him, I do not think a specific, three-volume local reference biography grants someone notability where it's not otherwise shown to exist. Should we create articles on everyone in this 1200+ page Kentucky-specific reference book? I think that's a clear no. SportingFlyer  talk  17:04, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep. As also explained above, clearly passes the WP:GNG per available sources. Not all mayors of Ashland do but this one does. I have added a reference myself. gidonb (talk) 04:40, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * He is literally mentioned in only one sentence in the book you just added.--Rusf10 (talk) 05:06, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I will not take your "literally mentioned" too literally, as John Means is included in two long sentences. And again you are 100% off. I believe that John Means (politician) stands out above the rest of the mayors of Ashland that you nominated, because he was a regional business leader. Likewise, W. W. Patterson had a notable career. gidonb (talk) 05:34, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You're right, it is two sentences. Either way two sentences, now matter how long they are is not "Significant coverage" as required by WP:GNG. Also you are using the term regional very loosely, he ran the local bank. Banks were different back then, every small town had its own bank, not like today when you have big banks with thousands of branches.--Rusf10 (talk) 14:37, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * It's not a "clear" pass of WP:GNG. What we have is a decent directory article in a three-volume work, as I've noted above, typical of a collection of information from 1912. There's no use in arguing about that source. However, he's notable because of WP:NPOL, and WP:NPOL requires: Generally, a person who is "part of the enduring historical record" will have been written about, in depth, independently in multiple history books on that field, by historians. A politician who has received "significant press coverage" has been written about, in depth, independently in multiple news feature articles, by journalists. We need more sources to show notability.
 * What IS clear from the available sources is that his grandfather, Colonel John Means, is notable for being a member of state legislatures in both South Carolina and Ohio. SportingFlyer  talk  15:55, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * As these phrases were long, I could use the two sentences in the book to reference three phrases at our end! As a business leader he engaged in a variety of branches, including banking. Means is notable under the WP:GNG. The totality of his endeavours led to WP:SIGCOV. This is different from the "main fame" test such as the one you allude to in the intro. gidonb (talk) 18:41, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Interesting point about the family! gidonb (talk) 19:26, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
 * PS there was much more further in the book for legacy. We have two very solid books. Time to withdraw this nomination! gidonb (talk) 02:25, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * You really want to WP:BLUDGEON the hell out of this don't you? Even if I wanted to withdraw which I don't, it would just be symbolic since the discussion cannot actually be closed if at least one other person voted delete (which is the case here). Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with WP:WDAFD. The sourcing is still weak and I hope you know that "Report of Superintendent of Public Instruction." is a primary source and only has a trivial mention.--Rusf10 (talk) 03:06, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Your strategy here and elsewhere seems to be highlighting all that is irrelevant like primary sources or websites, while distracting from what is relevant to WP:N. I just added the 2015 "Kentucky Encyclopedia" that describes John Means' iron empire as one of the companies that "created massive enterprises out of the disorganized and weakened industry that emerged from the Civil War." I will continue to focus on all that is important for Wikipedia. gidonb (talk) 03:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Also awkward to bring WP:BLUDGEON up after arguing non-stop under my opinion! Only one editor here commented under every opinion that did not agree with his own and it wasn't me. BTW people withdraw all the time after referencing becomes solid. Better is checking the sources WP:BEFORE. gidonb (talk) 04:03, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * This is getting a bit ridiculous. You should probably both step away from this AfD for civility's sake and allow others to review the sources for notability. SportingFlyer  talk  07:52, 18 June 2018 (UTC)
 * I look forward to more opinions! gidonb (talk) 14:12, 18 June 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   11:59, 21 June 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep - but possibly rename. He seems to have spent more time as an industrialist than a politician. Berrocca Addict (talk) 18:16, 21 June 2018 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   18:32, 28 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep and move per above. Clearly meets GNG as an industrialist, politician. ~ EDDY  ( talk / contribs ) ~ 21:40, 4 July 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.