Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Louis Barthas


 * 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. Joyous! | Talk 00:11, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

Louis Barthas

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Only could meet notability because his diaries were later published, but looking at WP:AUTHOR, it doesn't appear that his book meets notability guidelines; a translation was published by Yale University Press, but doesn't appear to meet notability guidelines (there are book reviews as would be expected, and some chatter from bloggers and such about the book.) Mr. Vernon (talk) 21:19, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * There is significant coverage in this book from the Cambridge University Press. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:04, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Good find, is there more than the single page? --Mr. Vernon (talk) 22:08, 26 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Google Books doesn't show me anything beyond that page, which obviously isn't the end of the coverage of the subject, but there's enough there to show that there is significant coverage in that source. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Actually you can look at the appendix and see that he was only mentioned on pages 93-94, and now that Google Books is letting me look at page 94, he appears to be mentioned in three paragraphs only. (He's also briefly mentioned on page 50.) He's also used primarily as a source judging from the context - he's not the subject of these paragraphs. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 16:59, 29 November 2016 (UTC)


 * The article is basically ripped from the French Wiki, so I took the liberty of adding it's references and bibliography as well. I replaced the gif with the image from the French Wiki as well. Let me know if you need anything, and sorry for not communicating before acting. Psychotic   Spartan  123  01:43, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. As well as the source that I identified above we now have another source written by Rémy Cazals, a historian, so notability is confirmed. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 22:10, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. Given the additional information provided, I hope Mr. Vernon would consider withdrawing the nomination. Newyorkbrad (talk) 16:40, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I cannot imagine how Wikipedia would be improved by the deletion of this article. Newyorkbrad (talk) 18:22, 29 November 2016 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how that is relevant. We judge whether a topic gets an article by notability guidelines per WP:N. On the additional sources using Google Translate: editions la decouverte appears to be from the publisher and is a book description and so is not independent, crid1418 is mostly about the book, enenvor.fr is a pretty good piece on the author. I'm sorry, I know you may like the work of this author but we go by notability and WP:GNG/WP:BIO for significant coverage. --Mr. Vernon (talk) 05:33, 30 November 2016 (UTC)
 * What Newyorkbrad said is always relevant to every action that is taken here. The whole point of anything we do is to improve Wikipedia. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 08:35, 30 November 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. His diary would be close to unique - not run of the mill stuff. WWI (the "great" war) was traumatizing for almost everyone involved, besides millions of people dying. The walking-wounded survivors ended up being struck by The October revolution and a Pinko scare here in the United States, the Spanish Flu epidemic of 1919, scarlet fever pandemics (before effective medicines, it often lasted a month or more), and battle fatigue. My own grandfather never spoke about it to his daughters, and only with the aid of Ancestry.com was I even able to get bits of his records. WWI was a total s#$@storm, and there is very little in way of primary, ordinary persons' stories available. Bearian (talk) 00:22, 2 December 2016 (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.