Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rex Hazlewood


 * 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. Consensus appears clear that offline sources are sufficient. Star  Mississippi  03:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Rex Hazlewood
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Hazlewood was a scouting official. All the sources we have are basically scoting publications, that are not fully indepdent of him. We lack any sources indepdent enough to lead to a passing of GNG John Pack Lambert (talk) 16:16, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete: Doesn't meet WP:GNG and WP:BLP, added maintenance tag.  Amadeus22  🙋 🔔 17:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * keep. I see absolutely no evidence that Blandford Press isn't a fully "indepdent" publisher. If Lambert can't be bothered to make accurate comments, he shouldn't be allowed in the deletion process and his proposals deserve to be rejected out of hand. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.15.62.184 (talk) 21:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Scouting Round the World is said by our own article to have been a publication of the World Scouting Organization, so by our own description of it it is not an indepdent source. So we have 1 primary source, and 2 sources that are published by scouting organizations, and one primary source. We have no fully indepdent sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:59, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Beyond this, is the mention in "Scouting Round the World'' even substantial? It evidently is all on one page. While that still could be a substantial reference, it also could be a passing reference that would not add to passing GNG. Even if it is, it would still be one mention in a significant source, the other work is a direct publication of the Scouting Association for sure and would not seem to show notability, so I do not think it is a 2nd GNG meeting source, so unless someone can identify other sources on Hazlewood, we at best have 1 when GNG requires multiple sources.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. Rex Hazlewood was a long term official of the Scout movement in the UK and made a very significant contribution to its development. He was a significant author, all be it in the specialist area of Scouting. I think it should be kept. --Bduke (talk) 07:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * What sources exist to support this view?John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:02, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep offline sources are not preferred but are allowed. That meets WP:GNG.--Paul McDonald (talk) 11:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * What off-line sources? You claim they exist, but do not explain what they are.John Pack Lambert (talk) 13:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * That would be in the references section on the article, where three are provided.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:19, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Published in sources, author with many published works, also notable is in scouting roles. North8000 (talk) 12:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Merely having published works does not make someone notable. There are people who have over 100 published works who are not notable. We need reviews of the works to show notability, not them just existing.John Pack Lambert (talk) 14:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - but someone needs to exapnd this article, please. --evrik (talk) 14:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Here's several books (from the google books link on the nomination) where the works of Rex Hazlewood are referenced as sources for material-clearly other people see him as a valued contributor and use his work as source material: Bloody Good, c2004; On My Honour, c2002; Urban Nation, c1968; all this speaks to WP:IMPACT. We can work through basic editing to add these sources and the fruits of the research over time, but that's an editing issue and not a deletion issue.  AFD should not be used for article cleanup.--Paul McDonald (talk) 14:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Abstain at this time. I did a bit of a search. Couldn't find a death date (an obituary might well support a notability claim, but, I found nothing the The Times).  The New Statesman 6 January 1961 707-708 did a review of a book he co-authored, "B-P's Scouts", but, I don't think that is enough to establish notability of a co-author.  I do note there is another somewhat older Rex Hazlewood who was an Australian photographer so searchers should be careful not to confuse the two.   I'm wondering whether much of this entry might be better in the Scouting magazine (The Scout Association) article given his main claim is as editor of an earlier incarnation from 1955 until 1968 and that many of the books he wrote/co-wrote complemented the work he was doing with the magazine.  --Erp (talk) 02:32, 14 May 2022 (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.