Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joseph Walkes


 * 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. The assertions of notability without no poklicy based arguments have been discounted. Happy to userfy or review if better sourcing merges Spartaz Humbug! 06:51, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Joseph Walkes

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Author/mason of questionable notability - possible WP:NOTMEMORIAL issue. Google news search for "Joseph A. Walkes, Jr." (the name he was published under) shows little coverage - regular search mainly shows links to his books (some self-published, some published through the Masons, no indications of notability, just existence) - no real discussion of the person, just simple listings. Fails WP:AUTHOR. Only references are to a memorial site from an organization the subject founded. MikeWazowski (talk) 20:38, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Walkes is well-known, but he is only well-known in Masonic research circles. Generally speaking, "fraternal accomplishments" by themselves are not enough to meet GNG or any of the specialty notability guidelines. MSJapan (talk) 21:00, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

KEEP (basis Article claims coverage in reliable sources) (also this is a false complaint issued by colluding persons seeming to collude and who are not experts and seem to have a personal vendetta)

Joseph Walkes is just as notable as everyone under the CATAGORY http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:People_known_for_their_contribution_to_Freemasonry

He is just as notable as the guy in this link who is living: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Brent_Morris

Therefore, being that this person is just as notable as EVERY OTHER person in that Category for People know for their contribution to Freemasonry - MSJapan issue is resolved. And it is a shame that you two colluding in deleting the Phylaxis Page, but allowed the Philalethes to stand. I personally find that to be racist and prejudice against Prince Hall Freemasons, and it's unfortunate even more that you call yourself a Freemason MSJapan and doing things like this. Odd. ..

As for MikeWaz, it's unfortunate that the only criteria you are using is surface google search. If you were to do a deep search on books that quote Walkes - he would appear next to every time Prince Hall Freemasonry is referenced. I have every book written about Prince Hall Freemasonry and since 1980, Walkes is referenced in everyone of them. You can't talk about Prince Hall Freemasonry without talking about what Walkes did with the Phylaxis Society and his books. I'm an expert in Prince Hall Freemasonry - I know who is notable and who is not - Gray and Walkes are notable.--Yosesphdaviyd (talk) 22:50, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete. The article fails to demonstrate that Walkes meets the general notability guidelines. —C.Fred (talk) 22:57, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

I've read the notability criteria and I can produce all of that stuff for this article except significant coverage if GOOGLE lol is the only means for determining significant coverage. People who actually read books about Prince Hall Freemason know Walkes. But if he is deleted then I will go ahead and nominate persons equal to Him such as the ones cited. Otherwise Wiki would be guilty of prejudice.--Yosesphdaviyd (talk) 23:32, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Wiki Notability Reasons


 * But, significant coverage is an automatic disqualifier, so to speak. The article currently cites no independent sources; all the sources are from the Phylaxis Society, which Walkes founded. Without secondary sources, the subject fails GNG, and thus is not notable. No notability, no article. —C.Fred (talk) 23:36, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Ok, according to the rules I have seven days before it is deleted. I see I went about the article the wrong way. I modeled the page after authors and I didn't think much this page being tested after I looked at Brent Morris and others, but according to the criteria at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notability_in_Wikipedia I can cite enough journals to demonstrate the permanent impact Walkes had on Prince Hall Freemasonry that will prove notability that way instead through google.--Yosesphdaviyd (talk) 23:51, 30 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - I would consider "founder of the Phylaxis Society" to be sufficient notability.-- SarekOfVulcan (talk) 06:13, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions.  —Tom Morris (talk) 21:27, 31 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 15:39, 1 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, BusterD (talk) 11:14, 13 August 2011 (UTC)



KEEP I've heard this Man's name before, couldn't really tell you much about him but isn't that supposed to be the whole point of wikipedia? Why should a few people "decide" what millions of people around the world can and cannot see on here?Villaged13 (talk) 08:58, 15 August 2011 (UTC) — Villaged13 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep - i think this is a good article and i think it should be kept. Tony (talk) 11:29, 13 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep RW notability looks likely, ability to meet wp:notability looks likely, and article sourcing comes close to doing that. North8000 (talk) 16:09, 13 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:PEOPLE. No evidence of notability (see WP:PEOPLE to understand what this means on Wikipedia) via any independent reliable sources discussing the subject or his writings (please carefully read WP:BASIC to understand what this means).  I did a Google search but found only stuff from Masonic sources and/or the Phylaxis Society, and sites selling Walkes' books.  If anyone is aware of sources which would suffice to establish Wikipedia notability, please add them ASAP.   Rich wales (talk · contribs) 01:06, 21 August 2011 (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.