Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jones Morgan


 * 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 no consensus. Stifle (talk) 15:40, 27 August 2020 (UTC)

Jones Morgan

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Almost no independent coverage of this man, basically got a small amount of attention for what's almost certainly a fraudulent claim of military service. One obituary and a few random list entries aren't anywhere near enough for a full article, and there's no chance of this ever being expanded. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 18:08, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge the reliably-sourced information to Spanish–American War (all the sources are unreliable or primary except the piece in the Kentucky New Era). A sentence added to the third-to-last para of the Aftermath section should do it (it also mentions another supposed last surviving veteran). Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:28, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 04:42, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG. Poorly sourced and "last surviving X" isn't notable, particularly as untrue here. Mztourist (talk) 08:43, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep The unverifiability of his claim is irrelevant as in American history there is a long tradition of elderly men claiming to be the last survivor to obtain pensions, for example Walter Williams (centenarian). In the last years of his life Morgan's claim was publicized, investigated, and the Associated Press carried his story nationally on multiple occasions: November 1990, January 1991, July 1992, AP obituary, Reuters obituary. This national coverage clears the GNG bar and is still relevant because notability is not temporary. Also covered in the Encyclopedia of the Veteran in America and a February 1993 article in USN magazine All Hands. There is ample sustained coverage of him in the Richmond Times-Dispatch going back to the 1980s, going so far as to comment on him fending off a burglar, where he voted one year, birthdays, and meetings with government and military figures. Kges1901 (talk) 11:06, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~ Amkgp  💬  18:18, 3 August 2020 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep The coverage in the Encyclopedia of the Veteran in America demonstrates that the subject is notable. Whether the article can be expanded or not is unimportant and certainly not a reason to delete. Andrew🐉(talk) 21:29, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep — Preceding unsigned comment added by UGAWOOD2020 (talk • contribs) 21:45, 13 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete This is an odd case of WP:1E, his event was living long enough to make an unverifiable claim and gain some fame from it. He fails WP:SOLDIER and WP:GNG, but has enough "coverage" to warrant a mention in Spanish American war.  // Timothy ::  talk  01:16, 14 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge to Spanish–American War. Don't see any significant coverage. Nomian (talk) 04:24, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio 13:13, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete, I'd say merge if there was anything noticeable to add to Spanish–American War, but as there isn't (go on, what would we write? 'Papers report that a soldier went home and lived happily for years thereafter' - hardly) and as there's no real story here, delete. Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:14, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep - The veracity of the subject's claim of military service has no bearing on whether or not he's notable. The level and depth of sources do, and, as demonstrated by Kges1901 above, and there's enough here to satisfy SIGCOV. schetm (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep or Delete but certainly don't merge anything to Spanish-American War -- it would be WP:UNDUE to even mention him there. The coverage seems weak but without newspaper access it's hard to tell. power~enwiki ( π,  ν ) 03:09, 23 August 2020 (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.