Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lloyd L. Gaines

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was NO CONSENSUS; thus, the article is kept. &mdash;Korath (Talk) 10:51, Feb 28, 2005 (UTC)

Lloyd L. Gaines
Original research. POV. Possibly copyvio as a literal transcript of an essay. Not encyclopedic. Radiant! 12:10, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)

Yes, it's egregious. Agree it should be deleted. Hydriotaphia 14:08, Feb 17, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Smacks of copyvio even if nothing can be found using Google. Unencyclopedic as things stand. Trilobite (Talk) 14:45, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable - zero Google hits, possible copyright violation. Megan1967 23:25, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * If you get zero Google hits, you must have made a typo. / u p p l a n d 17:21, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * ?????? this search gives me Results 1 - 100 of about 1,510 for "Lloyd L. Gaines" Dpbsmith (talk) 20:26, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Won a historic Supreme Court case in 1938 for admission to the University of Missouri against the State of Missouri. Pioneering civil rights case. Unfortunately, he died shortly afterwards. Capitalistroadster 10:16, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep for reason given by Capitalistroadster. It is a notable case, which a Google search shows, and it is treated in several articles in historical journals. Please look at the history of this article. It is most certainly not originally a copyvio. The essayish text which may be so was inserted on top of the original on Oct. 27, 2004. I have now reverted the article to the last version from before that date. Can the later versions be deleted somehow? (It is still quite possible that it is not a copyvio, and the later version actually had a lot of useful references and links.) / u p p l a n d 17:21, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * After Uppland's revert, I find the article interesting and encyclopedic. Keep. Radiant! 12:35, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, spurious notability. JamesBurns 10:40, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, significant figure in the history of civil rights in America. Kappa 14:46, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep in present form. The case seems to be very notable and it should be counted as a notable achievement for Gaines, who personally initiated the suit. It turns out that the New York Times published three articles about the case on December 18, 1938. One of is a long article with a long headline: "EDUCATION OF NEGROES TESTED BY NEW RULING; Missouri Plans Law School for Them And South Studies Implications of Supreme Court's Action SOUTH PUT IN QUANDARY." The story opens "State-supported education systems of the South have been severely jolted by the Supreme Court ruling this week... the decision is notice to all the Southern States that they must make far-reaching adjustments." Another says STATE EXPECTED TO ACT, and a third gives a short profile and photograph of the young Gaines. Dpbsmith (talk) 20:22, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete not encyclopaedic. Leanne 23:50, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.