Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Loring d. dewey


 * 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. Notability criteria established both in article and in discussion; the two cleanup templates should remain until stylistic issues are resolved. User:Ceyockey ( talk to me ) 00:58, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Loring d. dewey

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

non-encyclopedic essay; Delete --Mhking 03:09, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, this article has been cut down and follows an encyclopedia format. Also, there are not many great written works on this man; what has been found has been used. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Thatguy2320 (talk • contribs) 18:42, 14 April 2007 (UTC).
 * Delete, going with a lack of decent attributions and WP:ESSAY. -- Dennis The Tiger  (Rawr and stuff) 03:55, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:ESSAY. Loring Dewey does have a number of a few scholarly journal articles written about him, but this really does fall under WP:ESSAY and isn't focused enough.  dcandeto 04:31, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep if he does have a number of scholarly articles written about him, that totally fullfills the WPO requirements for N and ATT. It's the subject that has to be notable, not the article that has to be well written. The article is not encyclopedic by our standards, and the solution is to edit it. DGG 06:05, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment By "a number" I really just meant that his name gets some hits on Google that are on JStor. The total number of combined Google hits for "Loring Dewey" and "Loring D. Dewey" is still less than 25.  dcandeto 08:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * On that note, though, DGG has a point - the google test really isn't all that reliable. -- Dennis The Tiger  (Rawr and stuff) 20:44, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note page has been moved to the correct form, Loring D. Dewey
 * Weak keep Needs to be trimmed down a bit, and some WP:CLEANUP, but it seems that the subject IS notible. ffm   ✎ talk   13:34, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
 * comment a JStor hit usually means an article about the person or thing, while plain google hits are of course usually mentions. There appear to be about 12 articles all or partially about this individual. That is historical notability. It's not finding them on Google that matters, it's that they turn out to be publications in scholarly journals. JStor or Muse are just collections of online scholarly journals--the important part is the article in the journal. They are valuable resources here because the articles in them are listed in goggle and Google Scholar, and thus everyone can see the article exists and, usually, read the abstract. In the past, it was necessary to use  a library's print on online paid resources to find out even if an article existed. 23:38, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. The subject is definitely notable per multiple results in JSTOR. I have deleted much of the content that made the article essay-like and am currently working on improving it. Already I have added another source from an academic journal. -- Black Falcon 23:21, 17 April 2007 (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.